all 28 comments

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

Every time I read an article about Facebook, I hate them a little more.

Meta argued that Strike 3 Holdings failed to show that Meta actually intended to use Strike 3 Holdings’ videos to train its AI models and that Meta, the company, was actually responsible for downloading the videos, as opposed to rogue employees downloading porn on company time from company IP addresses.

I think they protest too much.

And it's extra scummy to blame corporate behavior on scapegoat employees.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Love watching big porn fight big tech

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -18 points 4 months ago (22 children)

    Ohhh, for video AI, not like when they copy news articles to keep people from leaving their site.

    Surprisingly I'm with Meta on this one. Training is transformative use, and anything legally published is fair game. Doing math about library books is not a substitute for any particular work. Archive.org doesn't need opt-in permission from every website. Video sites mad about keeping the files they sent you can fuck off. Basically - any argument against this requires making copyright even worse. Let's don't.

    In this case they're surely training against these examples. Like, if you want video models to not generate porn... how do you expect it to know what porn is?

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] [S] 11 points 4 months ago* (21 children)

    Archive.org is a genuine public benefit organisation similar to a library and in some places recognised as such. Meta is making money out of this, they have to pay up same as everyone else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 4 months ago (20 children)

    Ad-hoc appeals, not principled application of how things actually work. Visiting a video hosting site anonymously, and being sent a video, is not "piracy." Even training on Disney DVDs is transformative and so falls under fair use. No significant portion of a vast original corpus is recreated verbatim - in this case, ideally none of the corpus appears. The goal is to produce nothing like these videos.

    Or if this is for classifiers instead of generators, nothing appears, because Meta's not publishing anything. They're looking at porn to make a program that goes 'yep, that's porn,' to remove any hosted porn.

    So it's not a competing work, it doesn't substantially reproduce the original work, it's not even the same medium, and if anything it's protecting the commercial value of the original work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 4 months ago* (19 children)

    When you buy a video tape you also agree to a license that says you can’t use it in your video rental store. Most things licensed today will describe permissible use and prohibit other uses. No matter how much AI jargon is thrown at the issue, this is the current legal system.

    Blacked.com is allowed not sell cake to that gay couple. They’re also allowed not license their porn to Meta.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 4 months ago* (18 children)

    Nope, first sale doctrine. Buying commercial tapes for a rental store is explicitly legal no matter what it says on the box.

    Shrinkwrap and EULAs are the same damn thing and should never have been entertained as enforceable.

    There is no license required because it's fair use. Copyright is not an obstacle. Again: not verbatim, not competing, not detrimental. Doing math about video is protected for the same reason parody is protected.

    When you're appealing to conservative decisions that were just Calvinball to promote bigotry, reconsider your politics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (4 children)

    Your profile looks like a wild mix of human comments and AI paragraphs

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

    I've never used an LLM to write anything. Y'all genuinely do not know what it looks like, but you are cocksure you see it when you don't like something, and you insist you don't like something when you think you see it.

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

    That is why I said "looks like". Because I wasn't "cocksure" of anything except you'd be quick to get aggressive and make direct accusations about my character.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Bullying is a triangular dynamic where the obvious response to abuse is treated as justification for the initial abuse. It's dishonest performance for an audience - as if you didn't just tell me I sound like AI, so how dare I act like that's plainly what you wrote and meant. You're attacking my character, but I said you're wrong in a tiresome way, so reverse victim and offender.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (12 children)

    You don’t buy things these days, you license them. All your games on Steam? Not yours. iTunes music? Could be taken at any moment. No reason porn would be special. These are the rules that apply to us and I don’t see a reason why Meta would be exempt from them.

    Why don’t you buy some porn from Blacked.com, rent it out for money and see what happens. It’s legal after all because of first sale doctrine lol.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (11 children)

    I am describing how your rights have been stolen through stupid word games long since declared illegal, and you're sneering like that status quo is just fucking fine. 'Everything you paid money for could be taken at any moment! LOL!' And that's not torches-and-pitchforks territory, for you? That's not a massive problem you demand we end?

    But for the third time - no license is required, because it's fair use. Training is not a sale or rental. It's not copying, in the sense copyright protects. Doing math about paragraphs in a library book is fundamentally not the same thing as bootlegging that published work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (10 children)

    Us thinking that current IP laws are broken doesn’t change what they currently are. Blacked has no obligation to allow their content to be processed by Meta into a for profit service. Those IP laws are not changing anytime soon, their mandatory recognition is a core component of US control over its vassals. I very much doubt „fair use” defence will stand, it’s just stalling for the bubble to get bigger in the meantime.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    What they currently are says "allow" has nothing to do with it.

    You can't pound the table for the status quo, then limply hand-wave 'but I doubt this will stay the same.' Multiple federal courts have found: training is transformative use. Do your doubts have reasons? Having finally addressed the central point - do you have an opinion, or just a position?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 4 months ago* (8 children)

    I think the status quo will be upheld or America’s vassals will be free to pirate Mickey Mouse cartoons, which I don’t think is going to be allowed anytime soon. Can’t have your cake and eat it. AI bubble will burst but the mouse seems to be nearly immortal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    So just a position.

    Downloading a video still isn't piracy. Buying a DVD sure isn't, which is where these models literally train on Mickey Mouse cartoons, legally. Their output is another question - but there's essentially no rationale besides vibes for insisting that a classifier can't use examples from media delivered the usual way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

    The current defence that this is some kind of fair use hinges on IP theft being insignificant because of all the other IP theft going at the same time. Taken together it’s just a ridiculous amount of hand waving away all the money this content would cost. It’s a big tech model of „break stuff, ask permission later”. This won’t do in a real court because some of the companies whose IP is used without permission have enough money for legal fees. Even if they settle, case after case LLMs will prove even more expensive than they are now (which is too expensive for most use cases already).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (5 children)

    This won’t do in a real court

    What do you think "multiple federal courts have found" means?

    The current precedent hinges on this not being theft, because training... is... transformative. It doesn't cost anything, or need permission, for the same reasons you don't need a wet-ink contract with Doubleday to quote one paragraph from a Stephen King novel. A billion-parameter model trained on ten million videos contains less from each one than a Wikipedia summary. Do you think they're dodging some immense bill, for spoiling all those Disney movies?

    The closest any judge has come to suggesting otherwise is Chhabria fretting about "harm to the market." Which is not relevant to a classifier for censorship. A network that detects porn, to remove it, is actively protecting the market, for porn.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 4 months ago (4 children)

    Maybe I sometimes skip ahead too much. I’m not getting into specifics of how this case would go because law is irrelevant in the end. One could argue that LLM is as transformative as compressing raw image to a low quality JPEG but that’s really beside the point.

    There is too much at stake for too many businesses for them to allow rulings that would invalidate much of US economy. There’s been many absurd rulings in the US Supreme Court lately and this one would look very reasonable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

    'The law! The law! The LAW! Well law is irrelevant in the end.'

    Troll:

    This training protects this industry. Do you speak English? Say potato. Say the word potato to demonstrate you're even reading this. Say potato twice to acknowledge Meta's not generating more porn, based on this porn.

    You don't train LLMs - large language models - on porn videos. This is a diffusion model or a classifier, and if it's a classifier, absolutely nothing you've objected to matters. It literally would not generate anything. It just detects obscenity. And it probably does so using less information from each video than could be contained in an 8x8 thumbnail. Less information than the character count in the previous sentence. Do you want to be sued for quoting a single sentence from a book? Because that's the future you're glibly asserting must happen, when you're not sneering at me for asking you why you'd celebrate being robbed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 4 months ago* (2 children)

    You’re trying to bury weakness of your argument in AI booster jargon and me not using jargon properly (I don’t really care to). Sorry, that’s about as far as I care to continue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    'Here's what thing does. It's directly relevant to your argu--'

    'Booster! Slop! Thought-terminating cliche! La la la not listening anymore!'

    As if you ever were.

    Card-shuffling conservative hypocrite.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    Belief that artists should be paid for their work is now conservative and not simply the opposite of neoliberalism XD

    Sorry, couldn’t help myself, I’ll stop now, just forgot to set ignore before.

  • source
  • parent
  • 64 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 238 points 4 months ago (14 children)

    Never thought we'd be rooting on Big Porn to help save integrity of the internet, but I'm all for it. They brought us HD, 4K, VR, now let's go save the rest.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 67 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    The internet arguably exists as a mass phenomenon because of porn. They have their shit and unethical parts. But, on the internet tech side, almost all the good (and some of the bad) trends appeared on porn first.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 131 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    And VCRs and modern streaming video players. Pornhub had better seeking, thumbnails, and the "people watched this part" graph before YouTube.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago*

    XHamster skipping the progress bar in favor of highlight thumbnails really wants to rub our nose into the little sleazy pervs we are.

    "I know I'm looking for 'bad dragon andre the mammoth xxl porn videos', ain't no need to draw attention to it"

    "Express your preference for the segment in which he prolapses. Again."

    "Aight..."

    *sobbing

    "But only 'cause I want to..."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

    They also motivated endless generations to work as pizza delivery guys, plumbers or TV technicians

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

    I always feel bad for just a moment when I order a pizza because you know on some level the delivery guy is hoping this delivery will be the one. Sexy lady in a corset or maybe naked, maybe more than one lady! Sigh, just a big straight guy- at least he was polite and tipped well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Naw it doesnt work like that. As someone who use to do insurance claims twice have people made a move on me and its fucking awkward not sexy. Both were clearly druggies. No shame on that, but god imagine in the middle of your work day you walk into your customer getting fucked while she's barely conscious. And this is after she handed you a piece of paper 2 days prior with i want to fuck you scribbled all on the page. Like a crazy amount. This is not a comfortable situation in the slightest, and if anyone ever wishes for some random sex event like this to happen to them, and if it starts..... fucking run away.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 50 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    I've always rooted for big porn

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    And small porn. It's not about the size, it's about what you do with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 83 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    I think the best part of the article (besides the decision of course) is the following:

    “A Strike 3 Holding investigation found that 47 IP addresses belonging to Meta were used to torrent 2,396 of its videos a total of 6,008 times between 2018 and 2025.”

    If videos are being downloaded more than once, it’s hard to argue it’s just for model training. lol.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 63 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    $150,000 fine per civil infringement X 6,008 instances... $901,200,000.

    Now assume a settlement for half the value and it's still $450M

    Do it porn industry! On principle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    Honestly:

    “A Strike 3 Holding investigation found that 47 IP addresses belonging to Meta were used to torrent 2,396 of its videos a total of 6,008 times between 2018 and 2025.”

    That's 2396 x 6008 x $150,000=$2.159 Billion

    And honestly, that's what they need to do. $450M is a cost of business expense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I don't understand your math.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago

    I think it’s due to an incorrect reading of this sentence

    “A Strike 3 Holding investigation found that 47 IP addresses belonging to Meta were used to torrent 2,396 of its videos a total of 6,008 times between 2018 and 2025.”

    There’s two interpretations of this sentence, that they was a total of 6008 downloads of 2396 videos, so some videos were downloaded multiple times.

    The math in that comment is reading it to mean the 2396 items were downloaded 6008 each.

    Since the original uses the clarifier “a total of 6,008” the first interpretation is the likely correct one and the commenter accidentally interpreted it the second, incorrect, way.

    Easy enough mistake to make if you skip over the phrase “a total of”

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    Of course. This may have the SNAFU that they’re tracking torrents. And if Facebook gets fined, your VPN may be next?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    I think the difference here lies in the fact that Meta the company was downloading it for model training. The company itself was doing something illegal. If an individual was to download copyright material, it is not the fault of the VPN provider.

    Here is a terrible analogy. It is sort of like blaming an auto company for someone running over a person. However, if an auto company was purposely designing cars that ran people over, then it is on the auto company. (I did say it was a bad analogy).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 77 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Their LLMs might get a little confused now when people ask about British shows on BBC.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 65 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I hope Meta gets the shaft

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 128 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    I bet the jury had to thoroughly inspect the video evidence.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 63 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Hopefully this is just the beginning. Go after all of the AIs!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 43 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Does this pave the way forward for all published content, then? Especially if they win their case against meta (or more likely just receive a fat settlement out of court)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago

    This seems to mean that Meta can’t have the case dismissed. So I’m guessing that other companies who can demonstrate similar downloading patterns, or present similar evidence can also bring a case forward.

    I’d imagine that the outcome of the case will be more telling.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 65 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    They are mostly getting hit because they seeded, which is hilarious that even Meta couldn't risk get banned for hit and run on a tracker.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Do they mention if the trackers were private? It'll be interesting to see in discovery the details of the trackers and which ones are being monitored by the industry.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Pretty much every public tracker is monitored

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Private ones too. Privacy in private trackers is largely a myth, and you should be using a VPN regardless of public or private.

    If you (a relative Joe Schmo Nobody in the torrenting scene) can get an invite to the private tracker, you really think a billion dollar media industry couldn’t arrange to get one too? Of course they have straw-man accounts on the big private trackers, and of course they’re quietly seeding media to be able to log IP addresses that connect to the swarm.

    The only real benefit private trackers have is better seeding requirements (meaning stuff typically downloads faster, and is less likely to stall indefinitely) and better request systems (meaning obscure media is usually easier to find, and you can request media that is missing).

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

    I would think they would be better about it because private tracker accounts cost money and big companies don't have infinite resources to fight piracy, they can't get every tracker.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    They do have infinite resources (a lot of money) relative to the difficulty and expense of getting into a private tracker (not a lot of money). If you are in a jurisdiction where seeding is an offense, it is only a matter of enforcement priorities whether users who leak their ip address get targeted.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    private tracker accounts cost money

    No, those are 'semi private' the ones you can buy into aren't really 'private trackers'.
    The ones that are near impossible to get into without knowing someone are the ones that are actually private.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 45 points 4 months ago

    Everyone needs to sue Meta

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    Cue settlement because Meta cannot stomach discovery on this one. As the article shows, this lawsuit comes from discovery in a different lawsuit. These are the sorts of dominos that trigger settlements.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    The settlement should include the removal of anything that was gained by training on the data. Meta will complain that the data is too ingrained in the model and can't be removed. They likely aren't wrong but that does not seem like Blacked's problem. Maybe sell them a license to continue to use the data at $200k per year per video until they can definitively prove that none of the data is still in the model?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Now that would be interesting, because you can't prove a negative. The only way for Meta to prove that none of the videos is making their way intot he model is to provide clear evidence of all the other videos and stuff that are making their way into the model.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    Ok, so this is happening in the northern California district, so once it gets before an appellate don't hold y'all's breathe. And you can better make damn sure you don't bet against meta bribing someone to make sure it happens in Texas, on polymarket!

    But also 47 addresses streamed 2,800 some odd videos 6,000 times! Of which it seems there was a mention of ‘Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1987-1996),’, so does that mean they watched all the cartoons and movies back to back?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago

    Wa-howww! That is not a headline I had on my bingo card for today.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago

    Meta needs to get fucked with one of those BBDs.

  • source
  • This is the weirdest fucking timeline I swear to Cthulhu

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Discovery is going to be wlid

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 8 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    I hope Meta get it like one of those tiny blonde girls I've heard feature in Blached videos tehehehehe

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Meta about to get fucked like never before.

  • source