2 ms·
That copy didn’t go into a human’s brain. It went into GPU memory. It’s a copy under the law, no different from copying a Taylor Swift mp3 onto a flash drive.
by twoodfin 3y ago
That copy didn’t go into a human’s brain. It went into GPU memory. It’s a copy under the law, no different from copying a Taylor Swift mp3 onto a flash drive.
Whether that copy was fair use is the key question.
- prepend 3y agoIf I buy a license to listen to a Taylor Swift mp3, I can copy it onto a flash drive (or anywhere I like to use it). And that’s fine until I distribute copies to others.
- twoodfin 3y agoYes, and if OpenAI had a license to use the Times’ works as model training material this would be a non-issue, of course.
- bandrami 3y agoThere's really not a "license" in that sense for text. There's not some magical way you can use copyright to protect a probability model of the words you make, because that's style and style is not copyrightable (nor are the underlying facts the NYT reports).
- prepend 3y agoI didn’t buy a license for Taylor Swift that explicitly allows me to copy to a flash drive. Or to listen with only one ear, etc. I bought a license to listen and use.
- flir 3y ago> That copy didn’t go into a human’s brain. It went into GPU memory. But as you point out in the router case above, it's transient.