• makyo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I just wonder if they’ll get out of it because LLMs do reword the information instead of spitting it back out verbatim. It’s the same reason I think the image generators are safe from copyright law - it’s just different enough that they could plausibly convince a judge with a fair use argument.

    What bothers me even more is all the text they had to scrape to create ChatGPT… That seems like a novel problem for the legal system because you know there’s no way they paid for all of it.

    • DrM@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think for it to be fair use under American law they would need to give full credit, which they obviously don’t.

    • diffuselight@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      LLMs do no such thing. They abstract information which is a non copyrightable process. Copyright is specific to specific presentation, explicitly non converting style, concepts or facts.