215
Nvidia accused of trying to cut a deal with Anna’s Archive for high‑speed access to the massive pirated book haul (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 9 months ago (8 children)

https://torrentfreak.com/meta-secures-bittersweet-fair-use-victory-in-ai-piracy-case-250626/

Yesterday, U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria ruled on both motions, which at first sight offers a clear win for Meta. The court denied the authors’ motion to hold Meta liable for direct copyright infringement after it obtaining pirated books from shadow libraries via BitTorrent.

Did have piracy part. Just not listed on first website.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Thanks for the source. It also seems like the distribution part is not ruled on yet, so we don't know if they'll get away with pirating stuff just yet.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Hmmm, that got me thinking: if you selfhost, you make sure you also instal ollama or some LLM you can also self-host. You don't need to use the LLM yourself at all. Then if something goes south, and you're accused of piracy, you can just defend yourself that you used all these materials to train your own LLM. That should get you out of trouble, right?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    If you billion dollar company. Probably not if individual.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    @far_university1990 yes but the legal precedent has been set, lol(/s maybe)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    Again, they haven't made a decision on the distribution part of the training data, which is the one related to piracy. They only ruled that using copyrighted material for training LLM did not satisfy copyright infringement for the specific argument used by the authors against Meta.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

    Damn

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    Which would you rather, though? That they determine that pirating content is legal when used for training LLM or to continue with the precedent that pirating is illegal?

    Tbh, I'd rather they do the latter, because I doubt the former would set any precedent that allows anyone other than billion dollar companies from getting away with piracy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent