4 ms·

Yeah, it seems that would require a fairly fundamental shift in how copyright is understood in the U.S. Not something that should happen during routine process

Yeah, it seems that would require a fairly fundamental shift in how copyright is understood in the U.S. Not something that should happen during routine processing of DMCA notices. The EU is different, it recognizes copyright-like rights in databases and database works, which is why the cavalier attitude of U.S.-oriented organizations to these matters tends to annoy me. For example, the FSF does not actually check that certain non-code data files are legally unencumbered. They merely disclaim any copyright of their own. But for all we know, that could be wishful thinking.

chatmasta 4y ago
Early indications [0] [1] from the US Copyright Office seem to suggest AI-produced works will not be copyrightable: > If a work's traditional elements of authorship were produced by a machine, the work lacks human authorship and the Office will not register it. However, this guidance seems primarily about the stuff you create _with_ AI, not necessarily the model weights used in the AI itself. [0] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05321/copyright-registration-guidance-works-containing-material-generated-by-artificial-intelligence https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05... [1] Discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35191206 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35191206
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  AI weights are as much a mechanical, non-creative result of the training set and the netowrk initial state as other AI outputs are a mechanical, non-creative result of the prompt and the network trained state, so except that the input is bigger for the weights case for the same model as it would be for the output case, I don't see a difference.
  - chatmasta 4y ago
    I agree. But it's not like we could force companies to release the weights of their models. We might obtain them in other ways, such as unauthorized leaks, or reverse engineering. But if the company didn't intend to release them, does that mean they're protectable as a trade secret? And if so, are trade secrets enforceable in the same way as copyrights? (Also, another element to this case is that GitHub is owned by Microsoft, who has a conflict of interest with Meta in terms of ChatGPT vs. LLaMA)

chatmasta 4y ago

Early indications [0] [1] from the US Copyright Office seem to suggest AI-produced works will not be copyrightable: > If a work's traditional elements of authorship were produced by a machine, the work lacks human authorship and the Office will not register it. However, this guidance seems primarily about the stuff you create _with_ AI, not necessarily the model weights used in the AI itself. [0] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05321/copyright-registration-guidance-works-containing-material-generated-by-artificial-intelligence https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05... [1] Discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35191206 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35191206

dragonwriter 4y ago
AI weights are as much a mechanical, non-creative result of the training set and the netowrk initial state as other AI outputs are a mechanical, non-creative result of the prompt and the network trained state, so except that the input is bigger for the weights case for the same model as it would be for the output case, I don't see a difference.
- chatmasta 4y ago
  I agree. But it's not like we could force companies to release the weights of their models. We might obtain them in other ways, such as unauthorized leaks, or reverse engineering. But if the company didn't intend to release them, does that mean they're protectable as a trade secret? And if so, are trade secrets enforceable in the same way as copyrights? (Also, another element to this case is that GitHub is owned by Microsoft, who has a conflict of interest with Meta in terms of ChatGPT vs. LLaMA)