5 ms·

Copyright Shield > OpenAI is committed to protecting our customers with built-in copyright safeguards in our systems. Today, we’re going one step further and i

by bluck 3y ago

Copyright Shield > OpenAI is committed to protecting our customers with built-in copyright safeguards in our systems. Today, we’re going one step further and introducing Copyright Shield—we will now step in and defend our customers, and pay the costs incurred, if you face legal claims around copyright infringement. This applies to generally available features of ChatGPT Enterprise and our developer platform. So essentially they are giving devs a free pass to treat any output as free of copyright infringement? Pretty bold when training data sources are kinda unknown.

fnordpiglet 3y ago
It’s not unknown to OpenAI, presumably? And I assume the shield evaporates if their court cases goes against them.
layer8 3y ago
It probably also means having to remain a paying customer as long as you want that protection to persist for any previous output.
tyree731 3y ago
I am not a lawyer, but this doesn't seem quite "free". Note that they aren't indemnifying customers for any consequences of said legal claims, meaning that customers would seem to bare the full brunt of those consequences should there be a credible copyright infringement claim.
- Joeri 3y ago
  But it does guarantee that any customer that can’t afford a big legal team uses their big legal team, reducing the chances of a bad (for them) precedent caused by an inept defense. It also discourages predatory lawsuits against small users of their API by copyright trolls, which would likely end up settled out of court and not give them the precedent they want.
ShakataGaNai 3y ago
For large-scale usage, it doesn't matter what the devs want. If the lawyers show up and say "We can't use this technology because we're probably going to get sued for copyright infringement", it's dead in the water. It's a logical "feature" for them to offer this "shield" as it significantly mitigates one of the large legal concerns to date. It doesn't make the risks fully go away, but if someone else is going to step up and cover the costs, then it could be worthwhile. For large enterprises, IP is a big deal, probably the single biggest concern. They'll spend years and billions of dollars attempting to protect it, cough sco/oracle cough, right or wrong.
- zoogeny 3y ago
  To add to this, indemnification of this type is pretty standard in sensitive fields. One example I recall was closed captioning providers. If they caption some content incorrectly in a way that exposes their customers to legal action they guarantee that they will take the blame and they have insurance specifically to handle any settlements based on legal actions. I would expect this is a critical piece for medium to large enterprises that want to adopt LLMs. There are organizations for which this kind of indemnification isn't a nice to have, it is a requirement before even considering a product.
hyperthesis 3y ago
costs != damages
shmatt 3y ago
The investors will only get their 1000x if OpenAI can convince people its risk free to use. So they'll happily cover the legal battle to prove it or spent every last company penny trying
- thethimble 3y ago
  Or, alternatively, copyright risk is a major concern for real customers, and this is a major step forward in addressing that. Not everything needs to be so cynical. What’s good for investors can be good for users as well.
  - andygeorge 3y ago
    did an AI write this
    - andybak 3y ago
      Nice jab but it doesn't sound like AI so it's not as cutting as your probably thought.
  - tomjen3 3y ago
    Or if it turns out that copyright is a major issue OpenAI now have standing to fight any claims.
  - 9dev 3y ago
    You’re talking about the issue as if it weren’t your posts, your pictures, or content of artists you are into. This isn’t a ”copyright risk“, it’s a Silicon Valley corporation getting away with declaring copyright just… obsolete.
    - lucubratory 3y ago
      They are my content, actually, from the last ~15 years of being on the internet. I don't care about it personally, and even if I did it is really obviously fair use so even if I find it objectionable I don't get to actually legally compel someone to stop.
cdolan 3y ago
"Everything that is old is new again" Thats called "...we have Microsoft's lawyers behind us. Bring it on!"
gumballindie 3y ago
Yeah so they will basically give protection, like mafia rackets, to anyone using their loot. Classic among a certain type of “business” people.

by bluck 3y ago

fnordpiglet 3y ago

It’s not unknown to OpenAI, presumably? And I assume the shield evaporates if their court cases goes against them.

layer8 3y ago

It probably also means having to remain a paying customer as long as you want that protection to persist for any previous output.

tyree731 3y ago

I am not a lawyer, but this doesn't seem quite "free". Note that they aren't indemnifying customers for any consequences of said legal claims, meaning that customers would seem to bare the full brunt of those consequences should there be a credible copyright infringement claim.

Joeri 3y ago
But it does guarantee that any customer that can’t afford a big legal team uses their big legal team, reducing the chances of a bad (for them) precedent caused by an inept defense. It also discourages predatory lawsuits against small users of their API by copyright trolls, which would likely end up settled out of court and not give them the precedent they want.

ShakataGaNai 3y ago

For large-scale usage, it doesn't matter what the devs want. If the lawyers show up and say "We can't use this technology because we're probably going to get sued for copyright infringement", it's dead in the water. It's a logical "feature" for them to offer this "shield" as it significantly mitigates one of the large legal concerns to date. It doesn't make the risks fully go away, but if someone else is going to step up and cover the costs, then it could be worthwhile. For large enterprises, IP is a big deal, probably the single biggest concern. They'll spend years and billions of dollars attempting to protect it, cough sco/oracle cough, right or wrong.

zoogeny 3y ago
To add to this, indemnification of this type is pretty standard in sensitive fields. One example I recall was closed captioning providers. If they caption some content incorrectly in a way that exposes their customers to legal action they guarantee that they will take the blame and they have insurance specifically to handle any settlements based on legal actions. I would expect this is a critical piece for medium to large enterprises that want to adopt LLMs. There are organizations for which this kind of indemnification isn't a nice to have, it is a requirement before even considering a product.

hyperthesis 3y ago

costs != damages

shmatt 3y ago

The investors will only get their 1000x if OpenAI can convince people its risk free to use. So they'll happily cover the legal battle to prove it or spent every last company penny trying

thethimble 3y ago
Or, alternatively, copyright risk is a major concern for real customers, and this is a major step forward in addressing that. Not everything needs to be so cynical. What’s good for investors can be good for users as well.
- andygeorge 3y ago
  did an AI write this
  - andybak 3y ago
    Nice jab but it doesn't sound like AI so it's not as cutting as your probably thought.
- tomjen3 3y ago
  Or if it turns out that copyright is a major issue OpenAI now have standing to fight any claims.
- 9dev 3y ago
  You’re talking about the issue as if it weren’t your posts, your pictures, or content of artists you are into. This isn’t a ”copyright risk“, it’s a Silicon Valley corporation getting away with declaring copyright just… obsolete.
  - lucubratory 3y ago
    They are my content, actually, from the last ~15 years of being on the internet. I don't care about it personally, and even if I did it is really obviously fair use so even if I find it objectionable I don't get to actually legally compel someone to stop.

cdolan 3y ago

"Everything that is old is new again" Thats called "...we have Microsoft's lawyers behind us. Bring it on!"

gumballindie 3y ago

Yeah so they will basically give protection, like mafia rackets, to anyone using their loot. Classic among a certain type of “business” people.