zlacker

>>ssgodd+(OP)
I'd bet they win, but how do you possibly measure the dollar amount? If you strip out 100% of NYT content from GPT-4, I don't think you'd notice a difference. But if you go domain by domain and continue stripping training data, the model will eventually get worse.

>>mritch+W2
Take estimated losses of the NYT from this "innovation" and multiply by 10^x where is "x" high enough to make tech companies stop and think before they break laws next time. That would be my approach at least.

>>kfk+Z3
which laws are broken exactly? it's not remotely settled law that "training an NN = copyright infringement"

>>necrof+N4
The legal argument, which I'm sure you are very well aware of, is that training a model on data, reorganizing, and then presenting that data as your own is copyright infringement.

>>LargeT+X5
I don't think OP is arguing in bad faith.The fact is it's unclear what laws this legal argument is supported by.

>>profes+ig
Agreed, it is unclear. It's also a very commonly discussed issue with generative AI and there's been a significant amount of buzz around this. Is the NYT testing the legal waters? Maybe. Will this case set precedent? Yes. Is this a silly, random, completely unhinged case to bring?

No.