Comment on Authors Are Furious After Finding Their Works on List of Books Used To Train AI

RalphWolf@lemmy.ca ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• FaceDeer@kbin.social ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It hasn't been tested in court yet but I don't see why it shouldn't.

  source

  • admin@lemmy.my-box.dev ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work.

    I don’t see why it should.

    source

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      The creation of the AI model is transformative. The AI's model does not contain a literal copy of the copyrighted work.

      source

      • admin@lemmy.my-box.dev ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        No, but the training data does contain a copy. And making a model is not criticising, commenting upon, or creating a parody of it.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• lloram239@feddit.de ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc. decided that it is fair use to scan books and make large parts of them available verbatim on the net.

  source
• kromem@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  The training argument is probably going to come up dry by the time the court works its way through expert testimony, as the underlying argument for training as infringement is insane.

  But where OpenAI is probably in hot water is that torrenting 100k books in the first place runs afoul of existing copyright legislation.

  Everyone is debating the training in these suits, but the real meat and potatoes is going to be the initial infringement of obtaining the books, not how they were subsequently used.

  source