[1] https://www.bereskinparr.com/doc/chatgpt-ip-strategy
[2] https://hbr.org/2023/04/generative-ai-has-an-intellectual-pr...
From [1] > OpenAI’s Terms of Use, for example, assign all of its rights, title, and interest in the output to the user who provides the input, provided the user complies with the Terms of Use.
Re: [2]: I believe I referenced these specific concerns earlier where I said: "I only see some where OpenAI is trying to weaken any existing copyright protections, to their benefit. I must be missing something." This resource shows where OpenAI is trying to weaken copyright, not where they they are trying to strengthen it. It's somewhat of an antithesis to your earlier claims.
I notice you don't have a [0]-index, was there a third resource you were considering and deleted or are you just an avid Julia programmer?
Didn't say they do. I said "these are broad questions whose answers are worth serious legal time." I was suggesting one angle I would lobby for were that my job.
It's a live battlefield. Nobody is going to pay tens of thousands of dollars and then post it online, or put out for free what they can charge for.
> OpenAI’s Terms of Use, for example, assign all of its rights, title, and interest in the output to the user
Subject to restrictions, e.g. not using it to "develop models that compete with OpenAI" or "discover the source code or underlying components of models, algorithms, and systems of the Services" [1]. Within the context of open-source competition, those are huge openings.
> shows where OpenAI is trying to weaken copyright, not where they they are trying to strengthen it
It shows what intellectual property claims they and their competitors do and may assert. They're currently "limited" [2].
> notice you don't have a [0]-index
I'm using natural numbers in a natural language conversation with, presumably, a natural person. It's a style choice, nothing more.