686
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Sinnerman@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago

OpenAI scraped the Internet, legally and illegally to power ChatGPT.

I'm not a huge OpenAI fan, but it's not yet been determined that they acted illegally. I believe the matter is still being pursued in court.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 30 points 1 year ago

I think people are too focused on the scraping, which is clearly not illegal, but is what the roch people who own the websites are hollering about because they wanted to make money off of selling the posted content they did not actually own

Open AI's implementation of image creation in the style of a particular artist using copyrighted works is going to be the big outcome.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

It's not illegal for a person to learn things online. That's one of the original purposes of the "world wide web" when it was opened to universities.

It is illegal to copy someone's brand and use it to make money. These chat bots are literally charging people to take input like "write a story in this author's style" and outputting a story that is a poor mimicry. The main problem is they are charging money based on someone else's trademark. Not that they write a similar story.

[-] uranibaba@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

This feels like Andy Warhol's art combined with TPB's court processing.

Andy earned money buy making art using other's art and TPB sold ads while telling you where you could aquire content illegaly, while never actually hosting any of the content.

Where does the line go? If I write a book the is similar to someone else's book, is that illegal? If I use a tool to help me write? Which tools are allowed and which are not?

It is going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

[-] weedwhacking@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago
[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Illegally, maybe. Immorally, probably not. It’s fine for a human to read something and learn from it, so why not an algorithm? All of the original content is diluted into statistics so much that the source material does not exist in the model. They didn’t hack any databases, they merely use information that’s already available for anyone to read on the internet.

Honestly, the real problem is not that OpenAI learned from publicly available material, but that something trained on public material is privately owned.

[-] uranibaba@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

but that something trained on public material is privately owned.

Is that really a problem? Is a create something new based on public knowledge, should I not be able to profit from it?

I learn to paint from YouTube, should I paint for free now?

I'll admit that the scope of ChatGPT is MUCH bigger than one person painting.

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I’d say that was a more controversial opinion. From a purist perspective I tend to believe that intellectual property in general is not ethical and stifles innovation.

this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
686 points (91.7% liked)

Technology

57226 readers
3976 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS