zlacker

But it’s theirs, they created it and should therefore benefit from it. I’m honestly shocked at how much these companies are getting away with. It’s piracy on a massive scale.

You can get a little discombobulated reading the comments from the nerds / subject idiots on this site.

>>ametra+(OP)
Don't forget that (almost assuredly) some percentage of HN comments are made by these very LLMs in question!!

>>ametra+(OP)
The copyright laws are unjust to begin with. Copyright shouldn’t last beyond ten years anyway. Simply claiming that piracy is always bad ignores the evil of the laws in the first place.

>>ametra+(OP)
George R. R. Martin authored A Game of Thrones, but lost in-court against Google when Google Books reproduced parts of his text verbatim: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,....

No piracy or even AI was required, here. Google's defense was that their product couldn't reproduce the book in it's entirety, which was proven and made the prosecution about Fair Use instead. Given that it was much harder to prosecute on those grounds, Google tried coercing the authors into a settlement before eventually the District Court dropped the case in Google's favor altogether.

OpenAI's lawyers are aware of the precedent on copyright law. They're going to argue their application is Fair Use, and they might get away with it.

>>ametra+(OP)
Who's stopping their nyt articles in favor of chatGPT? Nobody stopped watching movies when their lines are in the lyrics of songs.

>>ametra+(OP)
It's "theirs"? The copyright monopoly was created to advance art and science, anything else is a mere perversion. So who are in the moral right, those advancing science by developing humanity's literal pinnacle of science, artficial intelligence, or those trying to hold the development back for their own commercial interest?

Mind you, Google books, literally just text from copyrighted books published for everyone online, was ruled "fair use", due to it's benefit to humanity.