all 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 100 points 1 month ago (4 children)

We're about to find out how much OpenAI is willing to pay to avoid discovery.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 59 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    So this company is suing based on a CA state law arguing unfair competition. To me, this case seems weak and if it does have merit in California it certainly won't in federal courts. Actual complaint rather than the ai summary pretending to be a news article

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Yeah, I don't see how anyone other than Hugging Face can have standing to bring a lawsuit over the breach. Is the unfair competition claim that OpenAI is allowed to hack Hugging Face with no repercussions but another company can not?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago

    Even shakier IMO

    "LASST suffered harm from OpenAI’s unlawful and unfair business conduct because LASST has been required to divert resources from its normal activities to educate regulators, civil society, and the public about the facts, legal issues, and potential dangers of OpenAI’s conduct".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 48 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    "Who bears legal responsibility when an agent blows past its guardrails and causes real-world harm?"

    That is very easy to answer - the person being responsible for what is running on that hardware when it's personal hardware, and in corporate environments the manager who is responsible for deploying the agent and the engineers who didn't ensure this doesn't happen if they failed in their responsibilities by not monitoring the system (dependent on if the manager even allowed suffcient ressources for monitoring, if not, they should also not share the blame)

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 1 month ago (8 children)

    AI is a tool

    Similarly you can't blame a hammer for causing harm, you blame the individual who holds it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    If you crush someone's skull with a hammer, you are responsible, not the person who made the hammer. But what if you crush someone's skull with a hammer that was sold to you as a head massager?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Sort of. With something as simple as a hammer sure, but when the hammer is equipped with a 9mm pistol then it falls under different safety standards that deem the tool inherently unsafe. A physical tool would be recalled if somebody got hurt in an unintended way.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 1 month ago

    The organization sued under California's Unfair Competition Law, arguing OpenAI's "unlawful and unfair business practices" diverted work and resources to responding to the Hugging Face incident.

    This ain't going anywhere. Hugging Face already had a large chunk of OpenAi money to keep quiet about the incident. No doubt they've waived their rights for future litigation too. A bunch of public interest lawyers in the US isn't going to help. The government won't allow it.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago