Judge : Copying information is not the same as copying content

Topic

New Reply

https://reason.com/2024/11/11/judge-dismisses-copyright-lawsuit-against-openai/

U.S. District Court Judge Colleen McMahon has dismissed a copyright lawsuit against OpenAI. McMahon’s decision, issued Thursday, is a win not just for OpenAI but for everyone who benefits from ChatGPT and similar programs…

* Its is now a wild-wild-AI West. Any data is free to harvest.

2 users thanked author for this post.

WSbobby-p, Sky

Reply | Quote

Replies

Isn’t the word “harvest” a euphemism for “steal”?

Human, who sports only naturally-occurring DNA ~ oneironaut ~ broadcaster

Reply | Quote

Mr. Austin wrote:

Isn’t the word “harvest” a euphemism for “steal”?

In this case the Judge ruled that there was no harm done by re-arranging scraped data.
No stealing has been done.

Reply | Quote

ps Every site, publisher.. has the right to block AI access.

Reply | Quote

So if a regular person copies content and profits from it it’s stealing/plagiarism and is naturally illegal, but, if a big tech company copies the same content and profits from it, someone somewhere waves a magic wand and the content magically transforms into “information” and it becomes perfectly legal? My eyebrow is very raised.

If it’s about harm being done then it’s incredibly obvious that harm is being done to the publishers by using their content to train AI, because this means that more people are going to use AI for “information” instead of reading the newspaper articles that “information” is harvested from.

1 user thanked author for this post.

windbg

Reply | Quote

OpenAI, ChatGPT and other AI companies have become organized criminals. They are actively stealing and misusing original works of creativity. If you are a creator, your work is being actively stolen.

The ‘judge’ is/was a criminal of the largest scale, with absolutely corrupt values, who was bought and paid for by other criminals, who are organized together. They bow down before their chosen god, which is money.

If you are a consumer of creativity, you are instantaneously complicit whenever you use AI. You have the option to ask yourself why the phrase “artificial wisdom” rarely appears anywhere – unless you actively search for it.

So, can you think for yourself? Now you must prove it. Or, are you instead an AI unencumbered with compassionate values for thriving lives?

Human, who sports only naturally-occurring DNA ~ oneironaut ~ broadcaster

1 user thanked author for this post.

Phil F

Reply | Quote