▲ 562 ▼ Nvidia accused of trying to cut a deal with Anna’s Archive for high‑speed access to the massive pirated book haul — allegedly chased stolen data to fuel its LLMs (www.tomshardware.com) submitted 9 months ago by schizoidman@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.world 54 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] jim3692@discuss.online -4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (5 children) No, it's "fair use" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Filetternavn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 9 months ago (3 children) Pirating books is not fair use. Using copyrighted works to train an AI model is not fair use. People seem to grossly misunderstand what fair use is, and how limited its scope is. Don't believe me? Here's legal the precedent permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Grimy@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago* (1 child) In his June ruling, Judge Alsup agreed with Anthropic's argument, stating the company's use of books by the plaintiffs to train their AI model was acceptable. "The training use was a fair use," he wrote. "The use of the books at issue to train Claude and its precursors was exceedingly transformative." However, the judge ruled that Anthropic's use of millions of pirated books to build its models – books that websites such as Library Genesis (LibGen) and Pirate Library Mirror (PiLiMi) copied without getting the authors' consent or giving them compensation – was not. Pirating isn't but training on copyrighted works is fair use, you just have to buy them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago So they can train with books they have legal acces to? Either bought, rent or licensed? permalink fedilink source parent [–] jim3692@discuss.online 6 points 9 months ago I was referring to Altman lobbying towards considering AI training as fair use of copyrighted material. I know that pirating is not fair use. However, AI companies seem to rely on pirated copies to train their slop machines, and they are trying to justify this behavior. permalink fedilink source parent [–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago A business is not fair use. They’re taking someone’s intellectual property and using it to make their product useful. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Filetternavn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 9 months ago (3 children) Pirating books is not fair use. Using copyrighted works to train an AI model is not fair use. People seem to grossly misunderstand what fair use is, and how limited its scope is. Don't believe me? Here's legal the precedent permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Grimy@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago* (1 child) In his June ruling, Judge Alsup agreed with Anthropic's argument, stating the company's use of books by the plaintiffs to train their AI model was acceptable. "The training use was a fair use," he wrote. "The use of the books at issue to train Claude and its precursors was exceedingly transformative." However, the judge ruled that Anthropic's use of millions of pirated books to build its models – books that websites such as Library Genesis (LibGen) and Pirate Library Mirror (PiLiMi) copied without getting the authors' consent or giving them compensation – was not. Pirating isn't but training on copyrighted works is fair use, you just have to buy them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago So they can train with books they have legal acces to? Either bought, rent or licensed? permalink fedilink source parent [–] jim3692@discuss.online 6 points 9 months ago I was referring to Altman lobbying towards considering AI training as fair use of copyrighted material. I know that pirating is not fair use. However, AI companies seem to rely on pirated copies to train their slop machines, and they are trying to justify this behavior. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago* (1 child) In his June ruling, Judge Alsup agreed with Anthropic's argument, stating the company's use of books by the plaintiffs to train their AI model was acceptable. "The training use was a fair use," he wrote. "The use of the books at issue to train Claude and its precursors was exceedingly transformative." However, the judge ruled that Anthropic's use of millions of pirated books to build its models – books that websites such as Library Genesis (LibGen) and Pirate Library Mirror (PiLiMi) copied without getting the authors' consent or giving them compensation – was not. Pirating isn't but training on copyrighted works is fair use, you just have to buy them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago So they can train with books they have legal acces to? Either bought, rent or licensed? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago So they can train with books they have legal acces to? Either bought, rent or licensed? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jim3692@discuss.online 6 points 9 months ago I was referring to Altman lobbying towards considering AI training as fair use of copyrighted material. I know that pirating is not fair use. However, AI companies seem to rely on pirated copies to train their slop machines, and they are trying to justify this behavior. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago A business is not fair use. They’re taking someone’s intellectual property and using it to make their product useful. permalink fedilink source parent