5 ms·

Interesting, the title should probably be changed to something more related to them being fined for training on copyrighted data. That's the more interesting p

Interesting, the title should probably be changed to something more related to them being fined for training on copyrighted data. That's the more interesting part here, they've essentially banned developing ai in France with this (though maybe they just won't go after their own ai companies).

wongarsu 3y ago
Developing AI with news articles. It doesn't stop you from e.g. licensing reddit data and training on that. And it's unclear if other companies would actually run afoul of this at all, or whether this is just applicable because of the terms Google agreed to in the 2022 settlement about using news articles in their search engine. For a settlement agreement to make sense at all they obviously had to agree to stricter terms than what the regulation itself demands.
- ApolloFortyNine 3y ago
  >Developing AI with news articles. It doesn't stop you from e.g. licensing reddit data and training on that. Good luck competing with AI that were able to train on all data instead of just a small subset. Japan has already codified it into law, I expect if other countries pile in on calling it a violation of copyright, many will set up an entity there.
- nradov 3y ago
  A few large media companies own the copyright on the majority of news articles. AI companies can just pay to license the content (or give an equity stake in exchange).
isodev 3y ago
Anyone is welcome to pay a publication or an author (for books/magazines etc) in order to use their data for training. Companies are also welcome to request consent from individuals to use their online posts for this purpose. Otherwise, what OpenAI/Gemini are doing is, simply put, "theft".
- djohnston 3y ago
  In France. So the AI winners won’t come from France, although some participants will certainly be French contributing their talents abroad.
  - Ragnarork 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - djohnston 3y ago
      Im Ok with the inevitably of that outcome. My moral interpretation is incidental to that reality.
    - trueismywork 3y ago
      Why is it stealing? Is it stealing for you to learn something from a public blog post without paying for the book?
      - throw10920 3y ago
        The public blog post is offered as exactly that, public. The copyrighted content that Google trained on was not public, not paid for, not permitted to be used in training, and not used to train people, only AI. There's no relation between the post and the hypothetical you invented - it's misdirection at best and manipulation at worst to compare them.
worksonmine 3y ago
> they've essentially banned developing ai in France This is hyperbole. Intellectual property laws have existed longer than AI, they're being enforced on AI companies. These companies can pay to use the data, just like I would have to pay for server time with those same companies. They are richer than some countries, not students experimenting in a basement. And don't give me the "nobody lost anything" bullshit argument. I pirate heavily myself but I'm not a hypocrite pretending that I'm not taking something I should've paid for.

wongarsu 3y ago

Developing AI with news articles. It doesn't stop you from e.g. licensing reddit data and training on that. And it's unclear if other companies would actually run afoul of this at all, or whether this is just applicable because of the terms Google agreed to in the 2022 settlement about using news articles in their search engine. For a settlement agreement to make sense at all they obviously had to agree to stricter terms than what the regulation itself demands.

ApolloFortyNine 3y ago
>Developing AI with news articles. It doesn't stop you from e.g. licensing reddit data and training on that. Good luck competing with AI that were able to train on all data instead of just a small subset. Japan has already codified it into law, I expect if other countries pile in on calling it a violation of copyright, many will set up an entity there.
nradov 3y ago
A few large media companies own the copyright on the majority of news articles. AI companies can just pay to license the content (or give an equity stake in exchange).

isodev 3y ago

Anyone is welcome to pay a publication or an author (for books/magazines etc) in order to use their data for training. Companies are also welcome to request consent from individuals to use their online posts for this purpose. Otherwise, what OpenAI/Gemini are doing is, simply put, "theft".

djohnston 3y ago
In France. So the AI winners won’t come from France, although some participants will certainly be French contributing their talents abroad.
- Ragnarork 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - djohnston 3y ago
    Im Ok with the inevitably of that outcome. My moral interpretation is incidental to that reality.
  - trueismywork 3y ago
    Why is it stealing? Is it stealing for you to learn something from a public blog post without paying for the book?
    - throw10920 3y ago
      The public blog post is offered as exactly that, public. The copyrighted content that Google trained on was not public, not paid for, not permitted to be used in training, and not used to train people, only AI. There's no relation between the post and the hypothetical you invented - it's misdirection at best and manipulation at worst to compare them.

worksonmine 3y ago

> they've essentially banned developing ai in France This is hyperbole. Intellectual property laws have existed longer than AI, they're being enforced on AI companies. These companies can pay to use the data, just like I would have to pay for server time with those same companies. They are richer than some countries, not students experimenting in a basement. And don't give me the "nobody lost anything" bullshit argument. I pirate heavily myself but I'm not a hypocrite pretending that I'm not taking something I should've paid for.