OpenAI now tries to hide that ChatGPT was trained on copyrighted books, including J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series::A new research paper laid out ways in which AI developers should try and avoid showing LLMs have been trained on copyrighted material.

  • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, this headline is trying to make it seem like training on copyrighted material is or should be wrong.

    • scv@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Legally the output of the training could be considered a derived work. We treat brains differently here, that’s all.

      I think the current intellectual property system makes no sense and AI is revealing that fact.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think this brings up broader questions about the currently quite extreme interpretation of copyright. Personally I don’t think its wrong to sample from or create derivative works from something that is accessible. If its not behind lock and key, its free to use. If you have a problem with that, then put it behind lock and key. No one is forcing you to share your art with the world.

      • Bogasse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most books are actually locked behind paywalls and not free to use? Or maybe I don’t understand what you meant?

      • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Following that, if a sailor is the sea were to put a copy of a protected book on the internet and ChatGPT was trained on it, how that argument would go? The copyright owner didn’t place it there, so it’s not “their decision”. And savvy people can make sure it’s accessible if they want to.

        My belief is, if they can use all non locked data for free, then the model should be shared for free too and it’s outputs shouldn’t be subject to copyright. Just for context