OpenAI is begging Parliament to allow it to use copyrighted works because it's "impossible" for the company to make money without them.
  • Fedizen@lemmy.worldEnglish
    903·
    3 months ago

    then perish

    If I was exempt from copyright, I too could easily make oodles of money

    • vaxhax@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      3 months ago

      How do you like my new song? I call it “while my guitar gently weeps” , a real banger. the B side is a little holiday ditty I put together all by myself called “White Christmas” .

  • teft@lemmy.worldEnglish
    733·
    3 months ago

    Sounds like an argument slave owners would use. “My plantation can’t make money without free labor!”

  • affiliate@lemmy.worldEnglish
    512·
    3 months ago

    “Limiting training data to public domain books and drawings created more than a century ago might yield an interesting experiment, but would not provide AI systems that meet the needs of today’s citizens.”

    exactly which “needs” are they trying to meet?

  • Treczoks@lemmy.worldEnglish
    491·
    3 months ago

    If a company cannot do business without breaking the law it simply is a criminal organisation. RICO act, anyone?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
      42·
      3 months ago

      If a company cannot do business without breaking the law

      I mean, which law? If Altman was selling shrooms or some blow that hasn’t been stepped on a dozen times, I might be willing to cut him some slack. At least that wouldn’t add a few million tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere.

  • glitchdx@lemmy.worldEnglish
    47·
    3 months ago

    Boo fucking hoo. Everyone else has to make licensing agreements for this kind of shit, pay up.

  • Snapz@lemmy.worldEnglish
    47·
    3 months ago

    You wouldn’t download a collection of all the art and knowledge ever documented in the entire history of the known universe…

  • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.worldEnglish
    401·
    3 months ago

    It is impossible for my turnip soup business to make money if you enforce laws that make it illegal for me to steal turnips.

    Paying for turnips is not realistic.

    You bureaucrats don’t understand food.

    @davey_cakes@mastodon.ie

    • Dkarma@lemmy.worldEnglish
      515·
      3 months ago

      More like I can’t sell photographs of turnips if I have to pay to take photos of them. Why should we have to pay to take photos of turnips when we never have had to ever?

      • DaTingGoBrrr@lemmy.mlEnglish
        111·
        3 months ago

        Not at all. They are using copyrighted material to make a product that they are selling and profiting from. Profiting off of someone else’s work is not the same as making a copy of it for personal use.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.worldEnglish
        6·
        3 months ago

        They’re someone else’s turnips though, not yours. If you’re going to make money selling pictures of them, don’t you think the person who grew the turnips deserves a fair share of the proceeds?

        Or from another perspective, if the person who grew them requests payment in return for you to take pictures of them, and you don’t want to pay it – why don’t you go find other turnips? Or grow your own?

        These LLMs are an end product of capitalism – exploiting other people’s labor and creativity without paying them so you can get rich.

        • BlueMagma@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          13·
          3 months ago

          To answer your first question: No I don’t think the person growing turnip that I can see from the street should be compensated for the photograph I sell of that turnip. What next ? should we also compensate his parents for teaching him how to grow turnip, or his grandparent for teaching his parents ? What about the architect who designed the house next door that you can see in the background of the photograph ? Should the maker of the camera be compensated every time I take a picture ?..

          Anyway back to AI:

          I think though that the AI model resulting from freely accessing all images should also be fully open source and that anyone should be allowed to locally execute it on their own hardware. Let’s use this to push for the end of Intellectual property.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.worldEnglish
            4·
            3 months ago

            That’s a slippery slope fallacy. We can compensate the person with direct ownership without going through a chain of causality. We already do this when we buy goods and services.

            I think the key thing in what you’re saying about AI is “fully open source… locally execute it on their own hardware”. Because if that’s the case, I actually don’t have any issues with how it uses IP or copyright. If it’s an open source and free to use model without any strings attached, I’m all for it using copyrighted material and ignoring IP restrictions.

            My issue is with how OpenAI and other companies do it. If you’re going to sell a trained proprietary model, you don’t get to ignore copyright. That model only exists because it used the labor and creativity of other people – if the model is going to be sold, the people whose efforts went into it should get adequately compensated.

            In the end, what will generative AI be – a free, open source tool, or a paid corporate product? That determines how copyrighted training material should be treated. Free and open source, it’s like a library. It’s a boon to the public. But paid and corporate, it’s just making undeserved money.

            Funny enough, I think when we’re aligned on the nature and monetization of the AI model, we’re in agreement on copyright. Taking a picture of my turnips for yourself, or to create a larger creative project you sell? Sure. Taking a picture of my turnips to use in a corporation to churn out a product and charge for it? Give me my damn share.

  • Bappity@lemmy.worldEnglish
    363·
    3 months ago

    “waaaaah please give us exemption so we can profit off of stolen works waaaaaaaahhhhhh”

  • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.worldEnglish
    33·
    3 months ago

    Some idea for others: If OpenAI wins, then use this case when you get busted for sellling bootleg Blu-Rays (since DVDs are long obsolete) from your truck.

    • tabris@lemmy.worldEnglish
      71·
      3 months ago

      Dvds still account for around half of physical media sales. Far from obsolete.

    • BlueMagma@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      11·
      3 months ago

      I don’t know about you, but that’s my endgame, I want the end of Intellectual property, which in my opinion is the dumbest idea and the biggest scam of capitalism.

      • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        3 months ago

        Here’s the problem: the big corpos also will gain this power, and with the brand recognition and their reach…

  • pyre@lemmy.worldEnglish
    353·
    3 months ago

    oh good. then fuck off. who knew copyright law would eventually be the good guy in a story.

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.mlEnglish
      3·
      3 months ago

      You know that old adage, “You either die the villain or live long enough to become the hero.”

      ;)