Comment on "Did you realize that we live in a reality where SciHub is illegal, and OpenAI is not?"
LibreFish@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Yes, because 1:1 duplication of copy written works violates copyright, but summaries of those works and relaying facts stated in those works is perfectly legal (by an ai or not).
unexpectedteapot@lemmy.ml 5 months ago
If you mean by “perfectly legal” a fair use claim, then could you please explain how a commercial for-profit company using the works, sometimes echoing verbatim results, is under infringing on the copyrights in a fair use manner?
LibreFish@lemmy.world 5 months ago
I do not mean a fair use claim. To quote the copyright office “Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed” source
Facts and ideas cannot be copy written, so what I was specifically referring to is that if I or an AI read a paper about jellyfish being ocean creatures, then later talk about jellyfish being ocean creatures, there’s no restrictions on that whatsoever as long as we don’t reproduce the paper word by word.
Now, most of the time AI summarizes things or collects facts, and since those themselves cannot be protected by copyright it’s perfectly legal. On the occasion when AI spits out copy written work then that’s a gray area and liability if any will probably decided in the courts.