this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
787 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

59568 readers
4427 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 now tries to hide that ChatGPT was trained on copyrighted books, including J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series::A new research paper laid out ways in which AI developers should try and avoid showing LLMs have been trained on copyrighted material.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LordShrek 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

are we no longer allowed to borrow books from friends?

[–] benni 9 points 1 year ago (13 children)

Yeah, but if you wanna act out the contents of the book and sell it as a movie, you need to buy the rights.

[–] nednobbins 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes but there's a threshold of how much you need to copy before it's an IP violation.

Copying a single word is usually only enough if it's a neologism.
Two matching words in a row usually isn't enough either.
At some point it is enough though and it's not clear what that point is.

On the other hand it can still be considered an IP violation if there are no exact word matches but it seems sufficiently similar.

Until now we've basically asked courts to step in and decide where the line should be on a case by case basis.

We never set the level of allowable copying to 0, we set it to "reasonable". In theory it's supposed to be at a level that's sufficient to, "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." (US Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 8).

Why is it that with AI we take the extreme position of thinking that an AI that makes use of any information from humans should automatically be considered to be in violation of IP law?

[–] assassin_aragorn 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Making use of the information is not a violation -- making use of that violation to turn a profit is a violation. AI software that is completely free for the masses without any paid upgrades can look at whatever it wants. As soon as a corporation is making money on it though, it's in violation and needs to pay up.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dantheclamman 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Google AI search preview seems to brazenly steal text from search results. Frequently its answers are the same word for word as a one of the snippets lower on the page

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] madsen 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The response from OpenAI, and the likes of Google, Meta, and Microsoft, has mostly been to stop disclosing what data their AI models are trained on.

That's really the biggest problem, IMO. I don't really care whether it's trained on copyrighted material or not, but I do want it to "cite its sources", so to speak.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›