this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2023
480 points (97.2% liked)

Technology

69947 readers
2005 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
480
2 authors say OpenAI 'ingested' their books to train ChatGPT. Now they're suing, and a 'wave' of similar court cases may follow. (www.businessinsider.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
136 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Two authors sued OpenAI, accusing the company of violating copyright law. They say OpenAI used their work to train ChatGPT without their consent.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Can’t reply directly to @[email protected] because of that “language” bug, but:

The problem is that they then sell the notes in that database for giant piles of cash. Props to you if you’re profiting off your research the way OpenAI can profit off its model.

But yes, the lack of meat is an issue. If I read that article right, it’s not the one being contested here though. (IANAL and this is the only article I’ve read on this particular suit, so I may be wrong).

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Was also going to reply to them!

"Well if you do that you source and reference. AIs do not do that, by design can't.

So it's more like you summarized a bunch of books. Pass it of as your own research. Then publish and sell that.

I'm pretty sure the authors of the books you used would be pissed."

Again cannot reply to kbin users.

"I don't have a problem with the summarized part ^^ What is not present for a AI is that it cannot credit or reference. And that is makes up credits and references if asked to do so." @[email protected]

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It is 100% legal and common to sell summaries of books to people. That's what a reviewer does. That's what Wikipedia does in the plot section of literally every Wikipedia page about every book.

This is also ignoring the fact that Chat GPT is a hell of a lot more than a bunch of summaries

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

Good point, attribution is a non-trivial part of it.

load more comments (2 replies)