3 ms·
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 doe
by 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 agoIt 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 agoIt’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 agoWell 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 agoThe 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.