5 ms·

good distinction IMO there's a hack about this, authors can claim that they allow for public use unless it's used for training LLMs. And all of training work

good distinction IMO there's a hack about this, authors can claim that they allow for public use unless it's used for training LLMs. And all of training work would fall under 2 because they would be used against the copyright.

echoangle 2y ago
I think they would need to have some explicit contract every time they want to sell the book then, though. I don’t think I am bound by some random terms someone writes into a book I’m buying. Those probably are only binding if a reasonable person would notice them before sale.
- zelphirkalt 2y ago
  If you arrive at the point of being able to buy that book, it means it has passed the publisher's hands and I would think, that the publisher was OK with those terms then, and limiting the usage of the text may in fact be effective. If it was self-published, then even more so.
  - echoangle 2y ago
    But the license restriction would have to apply both to the publisher and the customer. If I go to the bookstore, buy the book, make a scan, and train an LLM with it, how would you enforce your license as an author? The customer never knew that he shouldn’t have been allowed to train LLMs. Edit: I think I misunderstood the original comment, I thought the idea was to sell books and restrict use for LLM training. If we’re only talking about stuff that’s publicly released, the restriction should be possible.
    - zelphirkalt 2y ago
      Whether you make a scan of it or not, the license applies to the IP, I guess (IANAL). Whether the shop makes a scan should not affect you as the buyer of the actual book. What does the scan have to do with you? Whether the author learns about that scan and perhaps training of some LLM using the scan or not, does not change the legality of it.
      - echoangle 2y ago
        But the license doesn’t apply to me as a customer if I can’t be expected to even notice it. If I buy a book in a bookstore, no one would assume that training LLMs on it would be explicitly forbidden. And adding a note to the book would probably not be binding because no one is expected to read the legal notice in a book.
        zelphirkalt 2y ago
        Ah, I assumed, that the clauses regarding the use in training of an LLM are printed inside the book somewhere.
        EMIRELADERO 2y ago
        It would still be unenforceable because there's no consideration. There is nothing of value that the license gives me that I wouldn't already have if the contract didn't exist. I can already read the book, merely by having it in front of me.
        zelphirkalt 2y ago
        How does that give you the right to train an LLM on it? Or are we talking about training an LLM on it and never releasing that LLM to anyone ever? Then I guess it wouldn't matter. But if that LLM is released to anyone, shouldn't the author of the book have a say on it?
        EMIRELADERO 2y ago
        > How does that give you the right to train an LLM on it? Fair use gives me that right, not a contract or license.
        zelphirkalt 2y ago
        Whether that falls under fair use is highly debatable.

echoangle 2y ago

I think they would need to have some explicit contract every time they want to sell the book then, though. I don’t think I am bound by some random terms someone writes into a book I’m buying. Those probably are only binding if a reasonable person would notice them before sale.

zelphirkalt 2y ago
If you arrive at the point of being able to buy that book, it means it has passed the publisher's hands and I would think, that the publisher was OK with those terms then, and limiting the usage of the text may in fact be effective. If it was self-published, then even more so.
- echoangle 2y ago
  But the license restriction would have to apply both to the publisher and the customer. If I go to the bookstore, buy the book, make a scan, and train an LLM with it, how would you enforce your license as an author? The customer never knew that he shouldn’t have been allowed to train LLMs. Edit: I think I misunderstood the original comment, I thought the idea was to sell books and restrict use for LLM training. If we’re only talking about stuff that’s publicly released, the restriction should be possible.
  - zelphirkalt 2y ago
    Whether you make a scan of it or not, the license applies to the IP, I guess (IANAL). Whether the shop makes a scan should not affect you as the buyer of the actual book. What does the scan have to do with you? Whether the author learns about that scan and perhaps training of some LLM using the scan or not, does not change the legality of it.
    - echoangle 2y ago
      But the license doesn’t apply to me as a customer if I can’t be expected to even notice it. If I buy a book in a bookstore, no one would assume that training LLMs on it would be explicitly forbidden. And adding a note to the book would probably not be binding because no one is expected to read the legal notice in a book.
      - zelphirkalt 2y ago
        Ah, I assumed, that the clauses regarding the use in training of an LLM are printed inside the book somewhere.
        EMIRELADERO 2y ago
        It would still be unenforceable because there's no consideration. There is nothing of value that the license gives me that I wouldn't already have if the contract didn't exist. I can already read the book, merely by having it in front of me.
        zelphirkalt 2y ago
        How does that give you the right to train an LLM on it? Or are we talking about training an LLM on it and never releasing that LLM to anyone ever? Then I guess it wouldn't matter. But if that LLM is released to anyone, shouldn't the author of the book have a say on it?
        EMIRELADERO 2y ago
        > How does that give you the right to train an LLM on it? Fair use gives me that right, not a contract or license.
        zelphirkalt 2y ago
        Whether that falls under fair use is highly debatable.