3 ms·
There is an argument to be made that ChatGPT mildly rewording/misquoting info directly from my blog is copying.
by soared 2y ago
There is an argument to be made that ChatGPT mildly rewording/misquoting info directly from my blog is copying.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- munchler 2y agoSure, but that's a different claim and a different argument.
- Aeolun 2y agoAnd it is. And you can sue them for that. What you can’t do is get upset they (or their AI) read it.
- amiantos 2y agoI think to make that argument you would need evidence that someone prompted ChatGPT to reword/misquote info directly from your blog, at which point the argument would be that that person is rewording/misquoting info directly from your blog, not ChatGPT.
- Terr_ 2y agoI don't think so: The user is merely making a request for copyrighted material, which is not itself infringing, even if their request was extremely specific and their intent was obvious. OpenAI would be the company actually committing the infringement and providing the copy in order to satisfy the request. If the law suddenly worked the other way around, companies would no longer be able to prosecute people for hosting pirated content online, because the responsibility would lie with the users choosing to initiate the download.
- jillesvangurp 2y agoThat would fall under fair use. Legally, you'd struggle to prove any form of infringement happened. Making a copy is fine. Distributing copies is what infringes. You'd need to prove that is happening. That's why there aren't a lot of court cases from pissed off copyright holders with deep pockets demanding compensation.