4 ms·

I can get a printer to emit verbatim NYT content, and with a lot less effort than getting it out of an LLM. I find this capability of infringement equals infri

I can get a printer to emit verbatim NYT content, and with a lot less effort than getting it out of an LLM. I find this capability of infringement equals infringement argument incredibly weak.

mrkeen 3y ago
Try selling subscriptions to your print-outs.
- jncfhnb 3y ago
  The equivalent analogy here is selling subscriptions to the printer, not the specific copyright infringing printout.
  - ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
    I hope HP isn't seeing this
  - mrkeen 3y ago
    I disagree. A printer is too neutral - it's just a tool, like roads or the internet. Third parties can use them to commit copyright infringement, but that doesn't (or shouldn't) reflect on the seller of the tool. I propose it's more like selling a music player that comes preloaded with (remixes of) recording artists' songs.
    - jncfhnb 3y ago
      It is neutral though. That’s the whole point. You have to twist its arm with great intention to recreate specific things. Sufficient intention that it’s really on you at that point.
      - throwup238 3y ago
        It’s not neutral if all the content is in the model, regardless of whether you had to twist its arm or not. What does that even mean with a piece of software? A printer is neutral because you have to send it all the data to print out a copy of copyrighted content. It doesn’t contain it inherently.
        jncfhnb 3y ago
        Well I’m callin you a liar, and I’m open to being proven wrong. Show me a prompt that can produce the first paragraph of chapter 3 of the first Harry Potter book. Because i don’t think you can. I don’t think you can prove it’s “in” there, or retrieve it. And if you can’t do either of those things then I think it’s irrelevant to your claims.
        realusername 3y ago
        The fact that the NYT lawyers used a carefully written prompt kind of nullifies this argument. It's not like they stumbled on it on accident, they looked for it and their prompt isn't neutral either.
alexey-salmin 3y ago
Well imagine you sell a printer with internal memory loaded with NYT content
- Lamad1234 3y ago
  [dead]
JW_00000 3y ago
In the EU, countries can (and do) impose levies on printers and scanners because they may be used to copy copyrighted material (https://www.insideglobaltech.com/2013/07/12/eu-member-states-can-impose-copyright-levies-on-devices-such-as-scanners-pcs-and-printers-says-cjeu/ https://www.insideglobaltech.com/2013/07/12/eu-member-states...). Similar levies exist for blank CDs, USB sticks, MP3 players etc. In the US, this applies to "blank CDs and personal audio devices, media centers, satellite radio devices, and car audio systems that have recording capabilities." (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy)

I can get a printer to emit verbatim NYT content, and with a lot less effort than getting it out of an LLM. I find this capability of infringement equals infringement argument incredibly weak.

mrkeen 3y ago

Try selling subscriptions to your print-outs.

jncfhnb 3y ago
The equivalent analogy here is selling subscriptions to the printer, not the specific copyright infringing printout.
- ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
  I hope HP isn't seeing this
- mrkeen 3y ago
  I disagree. A printer is too neutral - it's just a tool, like roads or the internet. Third parties can use them to commit copyright infringement, but that doesn't (or shouldn't) reflect on the seller of the tool. I propose it's more like selling a music player that comes preloaded with (remixes of) recording artists' songs.
  - jncfhnb 3y ago
    It is neutral though. That’s the whole point. You have to twist its arm with great intention to recreate specific things. Sufficient intention that it’s really on you at that point.
    - throwup238 3y ago
      It’s not neutral if all the content is in the model, regardless of whether you had to twist its arm or not. What does that even mean with a piece of software? A printer is neutral because you have to send it all the data to print out a copy of copyrighted content. It doesn’t contain it inherently.
      - jncfhnb 3y ago
        Well I’m callin you a liar, and I’m open to being proven wrong. Show me a prompt that can produce the first paragraph of chapter 3 of the first Harry Potter book. Because i don’t think you can. I don’t think you can prove it’s “in” there, or retrieve it. And if you can’t do either of those things then I think it’s irrelevant to your claims.
      - realusername 3y ago
        The fact that the NYT lawyers used a carefully written prompt kind of nullifies this argument. It's not like they stumbled on it on accident, they looked for it and their prompt isn't neutral either.

alexey-salmin 3y ago

Well imagine you sell a printer with internal memory loaded with NYT content

Lamad1234 3y ago
[dead]

JW_00000 3y ago

In the EU, countries can (and do) impose levies on printers and scanners because they may be used to copy copyrighted material (https://www.insideglobaltech.com/2013/07/12/eu-member-states-can-impose-copyright-levies-on-devices-such-as-scanners-pcs-and-printers-says-cjeu/ https://www.insideglobaltech.com/2013/07/12/eu-member-states...). Similar levies exist for blank CDs, USB sticks, MP3 players etc. In the US, this applies to "blank CDs and personal audio devices, media centers, satellite radio devices, and car audio systems that have recording capabilities." (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy)