673
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] uzay@infosec.pub 36 points 1 year ago

I hope OpenAI and JK Rowling take each other down

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Sticky this comment

[-] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

What's the issue against openAI?

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

They used to be a non profit, that immediately turned it into a for profit when their product was refined. They took a bunch of people's effort whether it be training materials or training Monkeys using the product and then slapped a huge price tag on it.

[-] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

I didn't know they were a non profit. I'm good as long as they keep the current model. Release older models free to use while charging for extra or latest features

[-] BURN@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

They’re stealing a ridiculous amount of copyrighted works to use to train their model without the consent of the copyright holders.

This includes the single person operations creating art that’s being used to feed the models that will take their jobs.

OpenAI should not be allowed to train on copyrighted material without paying a licensing fee at minimum.

[-] uzay@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago

Also Sam Altman is a grifter who gives people in need small amounts of monopoly money to get their biometric data

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

So hypothetical here. If Dreddit did launch a system that made it so users could trade Karma in for real currency or some alternative, does that mean that all fan fictions and all other fan boy account created material would become copyright infringement as they are now making money off the original works?

[-] Stamets@startrek.website 0 points 1 year ago

"Stealing".

It cannot be theft as the product is publicly available and the original product is still available to other consumers.

You can not like this and you can argue against it but it isn't theft. Hasn't and never will be. The same way piracy isn't theft.

People might respect this bizarre corporate protection stance if you use the correct terminology. And yes. You're defending larger companies here, not individual artists. Copyright was invented for companies and corporations. They have extended copyright for decades to be able to hold on to stuff they believe to be theirs. They suppress creatives to take their work and put a copyright on it themselves.

The only people you're protecting with your argument are massive corporations. Have fun with that.

[-] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

If they purchased the data or the data is free its theirs to do what they want without violating the copyright like reselling the original work as their own. Training off it should not violate any copyright if the work was available for free or purchased by at least one person involved. Capitalism should work both ways

this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
673 points (95.4% liked)

Technology

60112 readers
1924 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