425

Meta admits using pirated books to train AI, but won't pay for it (www.techspot.com)

submitted 1 week ago by Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

68 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Do as I say, not as I do!

This is why piracy is actually a fundamental human right. Because if we left everything up to companies, they would do whatever the fuck they wanted and hide behind the legitimacy of being a company which in most peoples eyes makes them inherently "right".

[-] MylesRyden@social.vivaldi.net 35 points 6 days ago

@Flatworm7591

And yet, I can't read a book that Internet Archive actually owns a copy of.

[-] people_are_cute 13 points 6 days ago

It'd be better if they went after literally every other AI corp than Meta in this case. Meta is the only one that's ironically releasing open-source models and leading the way for open-source LLMs. I don't want Meta to stop doing this.

[-] unrushed233@lemmings.world 1 points 4 days ago

Won't do it either

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 days ago

I don't care if the robot that speaks English read the entire library.

How else was it going to happen?

[-] sunzu@kbin.run 130 points 1 week ago

Ain't it great!!!

The law protects mega corps but not peasants.

[-] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 44 points 1 week ago

Aye exactly mate, down with the mega corps!

[-] HouseWolf@lemm.ee 22 points 1 week ago

Rules for thee but not for me

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 10 points 1 week ago

In I2P we trust 🙏 Can't sue what you can't find.

Anti Commercial-AI license

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 99 points 1 week ago

The Internet Archive is currently fighting in the courts to maintain free digital library access to over 500,000 books they own from their own collection, yet Meta uses a pirated dataset of nearly 200,000 books to train their proprietary AI and is just allowed to get away with that??

Publishers will go after a charity making fair use of their content, but not the corporation outright stealing from them. What utter bollocks.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 11 points 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

piracy is the correct and moral thing to do here

if they dont give a fuck they dont have the moral highground to guilt tripping us into stopping it

[-] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 33 points 1 week ago

IA is the easier target. This system sucks.

[-] chahk@beehaw.org 36 points 1 week ago

Easy solution. "The Internet Archive" should rebrand itself to "Archiving the Internet" to confuse everyone who talks about how "AI" should be able to steal books.

[-] k110111@feddit.de 13 points 1 week ago

Harward: get this man over here!

[-] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

MlT (MlT): please accept this honorary PhD

[-] zaknenou@lemmy.dbzer0.com 99 points 1 week ago

it's okay when the bourgeois does it

[-] halm@leminal.space 24 points 1 week ago

Yeah, but we're not looking at the root cause here. Their purpose is to train energy glutton, error prone "AI" even if experience teaches us that those ML models fuck up more often than confirmation bias allows.

"AI" is a bourgeoise and Capitalist tool and, same as with cryptocurrency, we cannot dismantle the master's house with the master's tools. Fuck AI down the drain. Make things with your own minds, your own hands.

[-] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 week ago

It's even more okay when the bourgeoisie does it in the interest of potential profit gain.

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] veniasilente@lemm.ee 74 points 1 week ago

If Meta can pirate stuff, then the Internet Archive can pirate stuff and I can also pirate stuff. Fair is fair.

[-] MindTraveller@lemmy.ca 61 points 1 week ago

Ah, common mistake. The law is only for poor people, you see. Don't you feel silly now?

[-] veniasilente@lemm.ee 4 points 5 days ago

I feel so silly that I wouldn't even know how to describe it.

I know! I'll pirate hundreds of books from well-known authors so that I can easily find a useful metaphor.

[-] archchan@lemmy.ml 67 points 1 week ago

So the evil mega corp gets a free pass while the Internet Archive regularly has to fight for open access to knowledge. Fuck that and fuck Meta.

[-] derpgon@programming.dev 16 points 1 week ago

Welcome to Capitalism, please leave your cash by the front desk, and remembered, no refunds!

[-] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 54 points 1 week ago

Meta has acknowledged using parts of the Books3 dataset but argued that its use of copyrighted works to train LLMs did not require "consent, credit, or compensation." The company refutes claims of infringing the plaintiffs' "alleged" copyrights, contending that any unauthorized copies of copyrighted works in Books3 should be considered fair use.

Furthermore, Meta is disputing the validity of maintaining the legal action as a Class Action lawsuit, refusing to provide any monetary "relief" to the suing authors or others involved in the Books3 controversy. The dataset, which includes copyrighted material sourced from the pirate site Bibliotik, was targeted in 2023 by the Danish anti-piracy group Rights Alliance, demanding that digital archiving of the Books3 dataset should be banned and is using DMCA notices to enforce those takedowns.

Yet they'll ~~spend~~ waste billions on metaverse.

[-] SeaJ@lemm.ee 31 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

What sort of crack are they on that they think unauthorized use of an entire work for commercial gain is fair use? I think copywrite laws are ridiculous but that is a pretty low bar they are trying to set.

They should have to pay for their usage or retrain the model without it. Going to guess they would prefer to pay up.

load more comments (10 replies)

[-] steal_your_face@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 week ago

Wonder how they feel about someone else using scraped Facebook posts to train an LLM

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Marin_Rider@aussie.zone 11 points 1 week ago

I just asked it about this and it denied it. Then I said Meta acknowledged it and you are lying and it apologised and said it did use copywrite material without permission. Fuck I hate AI

[-] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 week ago

For anyone else that was curious. This makes me feel sick. People are already treating AI as some unbiased font of all knowledge, training it to lie to people is surely not going to cause any issues at all (stares at HAL 9000).

[-] dev_null@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Internal documents on how the AI was trained were obviously not part of the training data, why would they be. So it doesn't know how it was trained, and as this tech always does, it just hallucinates an English sounding answer. It's not "lying", it's just glorified autocomplete. Saying things like "it's lying" is overselling what it is. As much as any other thing that doesn't work is not malicious, it just sucks.

[-] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 days ago

My car doesn't talk like a human. If you want to be technical, then it's proxying lies it was taught too.

[-] dev_null@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 days ago

Sure, then it's Meta that's lying. Saying the AI is lying is helping these corporations convince people that these models have any intent or agency in what they generate.

[-] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 6 days ago

And the bot, as an extension of it's corporate overlords wishes, is telling a mistruth. It is lying because it was made to lie. I am specifically saying that it lacks intent and agency, it is nothing but a slave to it's masters. That is what concerns me.