3 ms·

OpenAI is saying that their service was used in violation of their TOS, which is a bit different than just copying data. To be clear I’m not on OpenAI’s side, b

by layer8 2y ago

OpenAI is saying that their service was used in violation of their TOS, which is a bit different than just copying data. To be clear I’m not on OpenAI’s side, but it looks to me that the legal situation isn’t exactly analogous.

DebtDeflation 2y ago
Tons of websites and books they scraped had copyright notices.
- layer8 2y ago
  Copyright and terms of service are different legal notions.
  - Maxion 2y ago
    Yeah, copyright means something and a ToS is virtual toiletpaper (at least in the EU)
    - layer8 2y ago
      This wasn’t about which is worse than the other, but about whether OpenAI would want to avoid court precedent for the one because of the other.
orlp 2y ago
If using data violating some ToS taints the model trained on that data, then all of OpenAI's models are tainted by the millions of ToS'es they broke.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- orionsbelt 2y ago
  Can you cite a source showing they violated ToS?
  - hdjjhhvvhga 2y ago
    Not just violated but also actively ignored: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42718850 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42718850
dkjaudyeqooe 2y ago
But whats the remedy in that case? Being banned from the service maybe, but no court is going to force a "return" of the data, so DeepSeek can't use it. It's uncopyrightable.
kavalg 2y ago
As others have noted, if one company agrees to the ToS, asks "the right" questions and then publishes the ChatGPT answers, there is not violation of ToS. Then a second company scrapes the published Q&A, along with other information from the internet and again there is no violation (not more than the violations of OpenAI).
hdjjhhvvhga 2y ago
> OpenAI is saying that their service was used in violation of their TOS Which is the most ridiculous argument they could use because they didn't respect any ToS (or copyright laws, for that matter) when scraping the whole web, books from Libgen and who knows what more.

by layer8 2y ago

DebtDeflation 2y ago

Tons of websites and books they scraped had copyright notices.

layer8 2y ago
Copyright and terms of service are different legal notions.
- Maxion 2y ago
  Yeah, copyright means something and a ToS is virtual toiletpaper (at least in the EU)
  - layer8 2y ago
    This wasn’t about which is worse than the other, but about whether OpenAI would want to avoid court precedent for the one because of the other.

orlp 2y ago

If using data violating some ToS taints the model trained on that data, then all of OpenAI's models are tainted by the millions of ToS'es they broke.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
orionsbelt 2y ago
Can you cite a source showing they violated ToS?
- hdjjhhvvhga 2y ago
  Not just violated but also actively ignored: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42718850 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42718850

dkjaudyeqooe 2y ago

But whats the remedy in that case? Being banned from the service maybe, but no court is going to force a "return" of the data, so DeepSeek can't use it. It's uncopyrightable.

kavalg 2y ago

As others have noted, if one company agrees to the ToS, asks "the right" questions and then publishes the ChatGPT answers, there is not violation of ToS. Then a second company scrapes the published Q&A, along with other information from the internet and again there is no violation (not more than the violations of OpenAI).

hdjjhhvvhga 2y ago

> OpenAI is saying that their service was used in violation of their TOS Which is the most ridiculous argument they could use because they didn't respect any ToS (or copyright laws, for that matter) when scraping the whole web, books from Libgen and who knows what more.