3 ms·
> Assuming they used that data... That's the key part. You haven't yet proved they have actually used your content for anything (other than, potentially, read
by guiambros 3y ago
> Assuming they used that data...
That's the key part. You haven't yet proved they have actually used your content for anything (other than, potentially, read the license to decide if they should include or discard from their training set).
But in practice we'll never know for sure if they are respecting the terms of licenses until 1) this is tested in court, or 2) there's some internal leak that points into either direction.
- JamisonM 3y agoI expect that OpenAI would concede that they used the data in any court case immediately to get that issue off the table, I really don't think they have a strong interest in foot-dragging on this stuff, right? I would think OpenAI wants the thornier legal issues actually settled so that the whole ecosystem can grow within those terms & they can lobby for the legal changes they need/want?
- lokar 3y agoThe alternative would be discovery on that issue, which they may want to avoid.
- mistrial9 3y ago> wants the thornier legal issues actually settled .. wants the thornier issues to be debated and re-tried ad infinitum, as long as they generate cash flow and build their moat(s).. more likely
- JamisonM 3y agohttps://the-decoder.com/openai-apparently-going-all-in-on-chatgpt-copyright-lawsuit/ https://the-decoder.com/openai-apparently-going-all-in-on-ch... This behaviour seems more consistent with wanting is sorted out than stalling for time.
- mistrial9 3y agoa motion to dismiss is "going all in" ?