zlacker

  “Through Microsoft’s Bing Chat (recently rebranded as “Copilot”) and OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Defendants seek to free-ride on The Times’s massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive products without permission or payment,” the lawsuit states.

I can't be the only one that sees the irony of this news being "reported" and regurgitated over dozens of crappy blogs.

  ChatGPT [..] “can generate output that recites Times content verbatim, closely summarizes it, and mimics its expressive style.”

If the NYT thinks that GPT-4 is replicating their style then [as anybody who has tried to do creative writing work with GPT-4 can testify to] they need to fire all their writers.

>>laborc+(OP)
> More on-topic: if the NYT thinks that GPT-4 is replicating their style then [as anybody who has tried to do creative writing work can testify to] they need to fire all their writers.

The complaint isn’t that ChatGPT is imitating New York Times style by default.

The complaint is that you can ask it to write “in the style of New York Times” and it will do so.

I don’t know if this argument has any legal merit, but it’s not as simple as you suggest. It’s the textual parallel to having AI image generators mimic the trademark style of artists. We know it can be done, the question is what does it mean legally.

>>Aurorn+01
All ai image generators can produce copyrighted works exactly. The level of modification is often barely more than you would get than if you slapped a filter on a copyrighted image in photoshop.

>>laborc+(OP)
Is your point that the NYT should sue bloggers? Or that given the existence of bloggers, they should not try to sue Microsoft? Or something else?

>>laborc+(OP)
All those blogs are _also_ violating copyright, so I don't see the irony? One doesn't spend a million dollars suing a defendant with pennies to their name.

I'd also expect the Times style complaint to have merit because it's probably much easier for ChatGPT to imitate the NYT style than an arbitrary style.

>>Aurorn+01
The writing of the new york times is so diffuse (they even have their own published style guide!) that it's impossible to make a claim to any "style", as there are undoubtedly millions upon millions of lines of text by authors who have been inspired by the NYT.

>>laborc+(OP)
I'm pretty sure the defense is the "NYT Style and Usage Guide"...

>>jprete+84
> an arbitrary style

..off to try "Gwern style"