Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 3 years ago

moderators

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

There's already been a summary judgment in this case ruling that the AI training activity was not by itself copyright violation.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Humanius@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago

I see. In that case I stand corrected.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] Natanael@infosec.pub 3 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

This isn't an automatic complete win for them.

Being allowed to train under fair use rules doesn't mean you're protected if your LLM still regurgitates content.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/07/nyt-to-start-searching-deleted-chatgpt-logs-after-beating-openai-in-court/

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 3 points 1 year ago

The lawsuit between NYT and OpenAI is still ongoing, this article is about a court order to "preserve evidence" that could be used in the trial. It doesn't indicate anything about how the case might ultimately be decided.

Last I dug into the NYT v. OpenAI case it looked pretty weak, NYT had heavily massaged their prompts in order to get ChatGPT to regurgitate snippets of their old articles and the judge had called them out on that.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent