this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
407 points (96.1% liked)

Technology

59713 readers
5858 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

OpenAI has publicly responded to a copyright lawsuit by The New York Times, calling the case “without merit” and saying it still hoped for a partnership with the media outlet.

In a blog post, OpenAI said the Times “is not telling the full story.” It took particular issue with claims that its ChatGPT AI tool reproduced Times stories verbatim, arguing that the Times had manipulated prompts to include regurgitated excerpts of articles. “Even when using such prompts, our models don’t typically behave the way The New York Times insinuates, which suggests they either instructed the model to regurgitate or cherry-picked their examples from many attempts,” OpenAI said.

OpenAI claims it’s attempted to reduce regurgitation from its large language models and that the Times refused to share examples of this reproduction before filing the lawsuit. It said the verbatim examples “appear to be from year-old articles that have proliferated on multiple third-party websites.” The company did admit that it took down a ChatGPT feature, called Browse, that unintentionally reproduced content.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] assassin_aragorn 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Only if the end result of that training is also something public. OpenAI shouldn't be making money on anything except ads if they're using copyright material without paying for it.

[–] themusicman 2 points 10 months ago

I was trained on copyrighted material... I guess I should work for free

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

Why an exception for ads if you're going that route? Wouldn't advertisers deserve the same protections as other creatives?

Personally, since they're not making copies of the input (beyond what's transiently required for processing), and they're not distributing copies, I'm not sure why copyright would come into play.