3 ms·

Wouldn't making this argument mean that ChatGPT is violating copyright?

• dragonwriter 4y ago
  LLMs (well, neural network models more generally, but LLMs are the main interest right now) trained on copyright protected source data are either (1) violating copyright, or (2) benefit from an exception to copyright of some kind (such as Fair Use in the US, as Microsoft has explicitly claimed in connection with Github Copilot.) Even if they don’t contain, in some manner, literal copies of works (and in some cases they do, since works can be accidentally or intentionally recapitulated), they are derivative of copyright protected works in a direct and mechanical way.
  • Taek 4y ago
    Fair use likely applies to LLMs. Its loosely equivalent to an artist drawing inspiration while watching a movie.
    • dragonwriter 4y ago
      > Fair use likely applies to LLMs Fair use is so radically different from anything else for which there is legal precedent that I wouldn’t put money on either side of a court decision of fair use. > Its loosely equivalent to an artist drawing inspiration while watching a movie. It’s loosely analogous to lots of things, on both sides of fair use, but loose analogies are potentially very bad guides for fair use analysis, which often turns on fine distinctions. Clearly, given that LLMs are reproducible in ways human brains during the history of Fair Use have not been, the cases are radically disanalogous when it comes to market impact, which is an explicit factor in Fair Use analysis.