2 ms·

Ok? The Google lawsuit and promising lawsuit of the Open library probably will result in a W for Meta. Torrenting is obviously the best way to grab lots of data

by b8 2y ago

Ok? The Google lawsuit and promising lawsuit of the Open library probably will result in a W for Meta. Torrenting is obviously the best way to grab lots of data to train on. Just because they seeded (torrent clients automatically do this) doesn't mean they actually uploaded anything if they couldn't connect to a peer or manually paused/stoped the torrent. Also the author slants the story against Meta and has a bias. At least I felt that way when reading it.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tiahura 2y ago
Aren’t they going to have to prove the FB seed seeded the particular blocks containing the works of the plaintiffs?
keernan 2y ago
I'm not so sure. imo it would be a stretch to suggest Fair Use should disregard how the copyrighted materials were obtained. For example, if Facebook employees broke into the home of a renowned author and stole private copyrighted materials they then used for training their LLMs, should the Court, in analyzing the Fair Use factors, disregard the illegal nature of how the copyrighted materials were obtained? I believe it unlikely a Court would be willing to reward such behavior. Once that principle is resolved, the next step would be for the court to consider whether it would make any difference if Facebook employees did not engage in the direct theft, but acquired copies of the stolen materials from the thief with full knowledge they were stoken. If the court believes both #1 and #2 would be unacceptable, their analysis would then proceed to consider if there were differences favoring Facebook if Facebook acquired millions of copyrighted materials via a notorious website widely accused of illegally posting unauthorized access to copyrighted materials. I suspect this will likely be the central issue of the legal debate. And, I for one, do not think Facebook has a very strong legal argument. Going back to the first step of the anslysis, I would be shocked if SCOTUS would be willing to state that how the copyrighted materials were obtained is irrelevant to the Fair Use analysis.

by b8 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

tiahura 2y ago

Aren’t they going to have to prove the FB seed seeded the particular blocks containing the works of the plaintiffs?

keernan 2y ago

I'm not so sure. imo it would be a stretch to suggest Fair Use should disregard how the copyrighted materials were obtained. For example, if Facebook employees broke into the home of a renowned author and stole private copyrighted materials they then used for training their LLMs, should the Court, in analyzing the Fair Use factors, disregard the illegal nature of how the copyrighted materials were obtained? I believe it unlikely a Court would be willing to reward such behavior. Once that principle is resolved, the next step would be for the court to consider whether it would make any difference if Facebook employees did not engage in the direct theft, but acquired copies of the stolen materials from the thief with full knowledge they were stoken. If the court believes both #1 and #2 would be unacceptable, their analysis would then proceed to consider if there were differences favoring Facebook if Facebook acquired millions of copyrighted materials via a notorious website widely accused of illegally posting unauthorized access to copyrighted materials. I suspect this will likely be the central issue of the legal debate. And, I for one, do not think Facebook has a very strong legal argument. Going back to the first step of the anslysis, I would be shocked if SCOTUS would be willing to state that how the copyrighted materials were obtained is irrelevant to the Fair Use analysis.