A routine John Doe lawsuit could become part of Strike 3 Holdings' $446 million AI training case against Meta.

Case file: https://torrentfreak.com/images/78.pdf
Case file: https://torrentfreak.com/images/80.0.pdf

all 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 39 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I hate how AI actually makes me want to side with copyright laws but it's one of the only ways to legally hurt them right now.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago

    I'm still against the way copyright works, but copyright laws being applied one way for us and another way for AI corporations is much worse.

    I see myself as championing equal justice, not championing copyright laws.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    The only way to have Sota model is to use copyrighted data so this ultimately benefits big AI in the end. They get a monopoly because of the cost that's added to making the model. That cost is passed on to consumers who are now forced into a subscription model. At least Hollywood and YouTube get paid though.

  • source
  • parent
  • 14 comments in c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com view that post
    [–] 40 points 2 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] [S] 12 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Maybe, although it looks like the company is trying to say they didn't do it

    However, even if the subscriber is who Strike 3 claims, Meta argues that nothing ties the downloads to the company.

    “They simply assume that the Subscriber is responsible for everything done on the IP address, and then leap to the additional, similarly unsupported assumption that he did it for Meta,” Meta writes.

    So presumably the executive himself would not be able to use an "it was for AI" defense since they don't even want to admit it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 28 points 2 months ago

    Imagine trying to goon and have it make national news

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Can I do this in my company laptop?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    while shielding it from legal liability

    You think the plan was to take the fall for the company? Why would he do that?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 11 points 2 months ago

    Not sure. For the sake of speculation, one possibility is that the maximum liability to Meta is billions of dollars, which they can clearly afford, but if it targeted an individual that individual could declare bankruptcy as is common in high award amount piracy lawsuits against individuals (and maybe they pay him off under the table afterwards). Maybe he just didn't think about it too hard. Maybe the risk of such a lawsuit succeeding is actually low somehow. Strike 3 seems to really want to tie it in to their existing case against Meta, probably to bump up the number of infringing works they can include:

    Last summer, the company took aim at a much larger target. Together with Counterlife Media, Strike 3 sued Meta, accusing the tech giant of downloading thousands of its films via BitTorrent to train AI models. With 2,973 films at stake, the case could be worth up to $446 million

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago

    Executive branch involving itself in Judicial proceedings, totally fine /s

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    How much of that was child porn? I'll bet it's more than a few.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 3 comments in c/technology@piefed.social view that post
    [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    This Ain't Coyote v Acme: a XXX Parody

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    Always who you most expect

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    they need to add to train AI to the end of the title.

  • source