zlacker

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+(OP)
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+31
which laws are broken exactly? it's not remotely settled law that "training an NN = copyright infringement"

>>necrof+R1
The training isn't the issue per se, it's the regurgitation of verbatim text (or close enough to be immediately identifiable) within a for-profit product. Worse still that the regurgitation is done without attribution.

>>necrof+R1
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.

>>necrof+R1
Right, hence the lawsuit. They allege that the Copyright Act is the law that was broken.

>>necrof+R1
No, we’re seeing the first steps of it (maybe) becoming settled law.

>>mritch+(OP)
I think the only feasible outcome of the NYT winning would be a royalty structure that would have OpenAI paying the NYT to access their work, including back payments

>>mritch+(OP)
If developers didn't win over github / microsoft copilot, what makes you think NYT will win?

There is something that doesn't smell right with microsoft, hopefully NYT will help expose it, wich i greatly doubt

>>LargeT+13
I don't think OP is arguing in bad faith.The fact is it's unclear what laws this legal argument is supported by.

>>LargeT+13
Can you elaborate a bit more? That’s actually just a claim, not a legal argument.

Copyright law allows for transformative uses that add something new, with a further purpose or different character, and do not substitute for the original use of the work. Are LLM’s not transformative?

>>LordKe+7c
I am not saying that NYT will win, but I think it is more likely to win because it has many more supporters (including politicians, judges) than developers do.

>>profes+md
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.