3 ms·

> I think an important legal question is: Do we consider a ML algorithm being trained on data the same as a human reading prior art for an innovation? It seems

> I think an important legal question is: Do we consider a ML algorithm being trained on data the same as a human reading prior art for an innovation? It seems pretty obvious that it is the same thing to me. Instead of the human reviewing the prior art themselves the human has written a program to do so, but this can't change the acceptable outputs produced by the human's creative process (that includes the ML in this case).

gravypod 5y ago
I agree with this sentiment but I don't know if the courts do. There is so much cruft in the legal system from problems entirely removed from today's moral and ethical standards for disagreements from bygone eras that will be used as case law here.
- jeremyjh 5y ago
  If people can write programs that launder IP then IP is over. That is never going to fly in any court.
  - murgindrag 5y ago
    It's more complex. Are you laundering 5 lines of code? Probably fair use. Are you laundering Windows? Clearly not okay. Are you trying to launder, or is it unintentional? Etc. There's a line somewhere, but it's somewhere, not at either edge, and it's a complex, odd-shaped line we haven't yet defined. I don't know where it is. However, it's not where you're putting it, and there isn't a slippery slope to "IP is over." If you use five lines of my code in a different system, IP hasn't ended.
    - gravypod 5y ago
      > Are you laundering 5 lines of code? Probably fair use. The amount of copying does not matter for a copyright claim. If you copy a single character from a codebase that could could get nowhere but there, and lawyers could prove it, that could go to court. This is a hypothetical but this is entirely possible. There have been copyright cases fought over single sentences especially in the music industry. > Are you trying to launder, or is it unintentional? I'm not a lawyer but in the US, Copyright is a strict liability statute which means intent does not matter.
      - noxer 5y ago
        The whole reply I post here is made from letters that I copied out of a Harry Potter PDF. Clearly that's not how copyright works.
        Sebb767 5y ago
        I think you missed the part where he states: > that could could[sic] get nowhere but there, and lawyers could prove it Also, the letters in this case are not representative of the creative work itself. If you used the title font to write your post (hypothetically, I know HN does not allow this), you'd be in bad water already.
        noxer 5y ago
        I could copy a whole sentence from the book and it would not matter at all. Or even 5 lines like the parent post said. >....you'd be in bad water already. Not true either, writing my message in harry potter font would do absolutely nothing. the internet is full of images which use these or similar looking fonts. Its called fan art or whatever, copyright laws are not applicable to this.
        NullPrefix 5y ago
        Programmers generate every possible melody in MIDI to prevent lawsuits - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22440944 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22440944
      - eesmith 5y ago
        Exactly zero real-world situations will have no "substantial similarity" (that's the legal requirement - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity ) except for a single character. Please explain how it "is entirely possible". Bear in mind that there must be creativity in that choice of character to qualify for copyright protection. If only one character is correct, there's no creativity. A sentence in a song has far more discretion for creativity than a single character in a software program. As best as I can tell, you would need to construct some sort of super-APL where "a single character" had significantly more information content than any Unicode glyph, to exceed any de minimis standard applied to a programming language. (Think Prince's "Love Symbol".) > that could go to court I think you mean "that could be found infringing." Going to court is trivial, even if there is no infringement.
    - cjaybo 5y ago
      > I don't know where it is. However, it's not where you're putting it How are these statements not contradictory? Do you know where the line is, or not?
      - EvgeniyZh 5y ago
        I know that my pizza is not dark matter
      - mrmanner 5y ago
        I don't know where my airpods are. However, they're not on the table in front of me.
    - jeremyjh 5y ago
      My point is only that running the text through an ML algorithm changes nothing. If the 5 lines are fair use, you could have copy pasted the lines yourself. If its infringement, it doesn't matter which tools you used to put the infringing code in your file.
dllthomas 5y ago
One big difference is that the human will (... hopefully) never be considered themselves a derivative work, whereas there seems to be a case to be made that the model is.

gravypod 5y ago

I agree with this sentiment but I don't know if the courts do. There is so much cruft in the legal system from problems entirely removed from today's moral and ethical standards for disagreements from bygone eras that will be used as case law here.

jeremyjh 5y ago
If people can write programs that launder IP then IP is over. That is never going to fly in any court.
- murgindrag 5y ago
  It's more complex. Are you laundering 5 lines of code? Probably fair use. Are you laundering Windows? Clearly not okay. Are you trying to launder, or is it unintentional? Etc. There's a line somewhere, but it's somewhere, not at either edge, and it's a complex, odd-shaped line we haven't yet defined. I don't know where it is. However, it's not where you're putting it, and there isn't a slippery slope to "IP is over." If you use five lines of my code in a different system, IP hasn't ended.
  - gravypod 5y ago
    > Are you laundering 5 lines of code? Probably fair use. The amount of copying does not matter for a copyright claim. If you copy a single character from a codebase that could could get nowhere but there, and lawyers could prove it, that could go to court. This is a hypothetical but this is entirely possible. There have been copyright cases fought over single sentences especially in the music industry. > Are you trying to launder, or is it unintentional? I'm not a lawyer but in the US, Copyright is a strict liability statute which means intent does not matter.
    - noxer 5y ago
      The whole reply I post here is made from letters that I copied out of a Harry Potter PDF. Clearly that's not how copyright works.
      - Sebb767 5y ago
        I think you missed the part where he states: > that could could[sic] get nowhere but there, and lawyers could prove it Also, the letters in this case are not representative of the creative work itself. If you used the title font to write your post (hypothetically, I know HN does not allow this), you'd be in bad water already.
        noxer 5y ago
        I could copy a whole sentence from the book and it would not matter at all. Or even 5 lines like the parent post said. >....you'd be in bad water already. Not true either, writing my message in harry potter font would do absolutely nothing. the internet is full of images which use these or similar looking fonts. Its called fan art or whatever, copyright laws are not applicable to this.
      - NullPrefix 5y ago
        Programmers generate every possible melody in MIDI to prevent lawsuits - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22440944 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22440944
    - eesmith 5y ago
      Exactly zero real-world situations will have no "substantial similarity" (that's the legal requirement - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity ) except for a single character. Please explain how it "is entirely possible". Bear in mind that there must be creativity in that choice of character to qualify for copyright protection. If only one character is correct, there's no creativity. A sentence in a song has far more discretion for creativity than a single character in a software program. As best as I can tell, you would need to construct some sort of super-APL where "a single character" had significantly more information content than any Unicode glyph, to exceed any de minimis standard applied to a programming language. (Think Prince's "Love Symbol".) > that could go to court I think you mean "that could be found infringing." Going to court is trivial, even if there is no infringement.
  - cjaybo 5y ago
    > I don't know where it is. However, it's not where you're putting it How are these statements not contradictory? Do you know where the line is, or not?
    - EvgeniyZh 5y ago
      I know that my pizza is not dark matter
    - mrmanner 5y ago
      I don't know where my airpods are. However, they're not on the table in front of me.
  - jeremyjh 5y ago
    My point is only that running the text through an ML algorithm changes nothing. If the 5 lines are fair use, you could have copy pasted the lines yourself. If its infringement, it doesn't matter which tools you used to put the infringing code in your file.

dllthomas 5y ago

One big difference is that the human will (... hopefully) never be considered themselves a derivative work, whereas there seems to be a case to be made that the model is.