Authors using a new tool to search a list of 183,000 books used to train AI are furious to find their works on the list.

  • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Tell you what, you get a landmark legal decision classifying LLM as people and then we’ll talk.

    Until then it’s software being fed content in a way not permitted by its license i.e. the makers of that software committing copyright infringement.

      • sab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Using it to (create a tool to) create derivatives of the work on a massive scale.

        • lloram239@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Better tell that Google and their search index, book scanning project and knowledge graph.

        • SirGolan@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Wikipedia: In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major copyrightable elements of a first, previously created original work.

          I think you may be off a bit on what a derivative work is. I don’t see LLMs spouting out major copyrightable elements of books. They can give a summary sure, but Cliff Notes would like to have a word if you think that’s copyright infringement.

        • FaceDeer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          An AI model is not a derivative work. It does not contain the copyrighted expression, just information about the copyrighted expression.

          • sab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Would you be okay with applying that argument for any crime?

              • sab@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re missing the point. I’ll make your example more specific.

                Well when fraud/rape/murder happens we have laws. So no problems.

                Those things happen. Creating a LLM based on copyrighted material without permission happens - it’s not a hypothetical. But even then, giving a punishment after the fact does not make the initial crime “no problem”, as you put it.

            • FaceDeer@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I would be, and I don’t understand why you think this would be a problem. I wouldn’t want the government to be preventing activities that there weren’t any actual laws prohibiting.