Technology

59670 readers

2743 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

334

Microsoft, OpenAI sued for copyright infringement by nonfiction book authors in class action claim (www.cnbc.com)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

62 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Microsoft, OpenAI sued for copyright infringement by nonfiction book authors in class action claim::The new copyright infringement lawsuit against Microsoft and OpenAI comes a week after The New York Times filed a similar complaint in New York.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

If I want to be able to argue that having any copyleft stuff in the training dataset makes all the output copyleft -- and I do -- then I necessarily have to also side with the rich chumps as a matter of consistency. It's not ideal, but it can't be helped. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Wait. I first thought this was sarcasm. Is this sarcasm?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

No. I really do think that all AI output should be required to be copyleft if there's any copyleft in the training dataset (edit for clarity: unless there's also something else with an incompatible license in it, in which case the output isn't usable at all -- but protecting copyleft is the part I care about).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Huh. Obviously, you don't believe that a copyleft license should trump other licenses (or lack thereof). So, what are you hoping this to achieve?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Obviously, you don’t believe that a copyleft license should trump other licenses (or lack thereof)

I'm not sure what you mean. No licenses "trump" any other license; that's not how it works. You can only make something that's a derivative work of multiple differently-licensed things if the terms of all the licenses allow it, something the FSF calls "compatibility." Obviously, a proprietary license can never be compatible with a copyleft one, so what I'm hoping to achieve is a ruling that says any AI whose training dataset included both copyleft and proprietary items has completely legally-unusable output. (And also that any AI whose training dataset includes copyleft items along with permissively-licensed and public domain ones must have its output be copyleft.)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Yes, but what do you hope to achieve by that?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In your mind are the publishers the rich chumps, or Microsoft?

For copyleft to work, copyright needs to be strong.

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

I was just repeating the language the parent commenter used (probably should've quoted it in retrospect). In this case, "rich chumps" are George R.R. Martin and other authors suing Microsoft.