this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2024
256 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

59999 readers
2837 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

The mere fact that ChatGPT “knows” about certain things indicate that it ingested certain copyrighted works.

This is the bit I'm responding to. This "mere fact" that you propose is not copyright infringement by facts I've stated. I'm not making claims to any of your other original statements

Verbatim reproduction may be copyright infringement, but that wasn't your original claim that I quoted and am responding to (I didn't make that clear earlier, that's on me).

"Apologies" for my autistic way of communicating (I'm autistic)

[–] phoneymouse 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

I think you’re using the word fact in two senses here.

I am making an argument that ChatGPT and other AI models were created by copyrighted works and my “proof” is the “fact” that it can reproduce those works verbatim or state facts about them that can be derived from nowhere else but in the original copyrighted work or a derivative copyrighted work that used the original under fair use.

Now, the question is — is it fair use under copyright law, for AI models to be built with copyrighted materials?

If it is considered fair use, I’m guessing it would have a chilling effect on human creativity given that no creator can guarantee themselves a living if their style of works can be reproduced so cheaply without them once AI has been trained using their works as inputs. So, it would then become necessary to revisit copyright law to redefine fair use such that we don’t discourage creators. AI can only really “remix” what it has seen before. If nothing new is being created because AI has killed all incentive to make new things, it will stagnate and degrade.