3 ms·
Its funny that OpenAI is complaining, they don't mind saying copyright doesn't apply to them if it makes them money.
by mosdl 1y ago
Its funny that OpenAI is complaining, they don't mind saying copyright doesn't apply to them if it makes them money.
- tptacek 1y agoYou mean, like, a pretty big fraction of everybody who comments on this site?
- gnabgib 1y ago[flagged]
- tptacek 1y agoI'm sorry, do you think I'm kidding about that? "Situational ethics about copyright" seems like a weird charge to throw around here. I'm not being glib.
- fc417fc802 1y agoSuppose that you genuinely believe that the majority of HN users suffer from "situational ethics" regarding copyright that work in their favor rather than according to any particular principle. It would remain entirely irrelevant to a discussion about a third party. Absolute best case scenario it's a red herring. That said the comment you replied to doesn't even seem to make sense in the first place. What does "violation of copyright for financial gain" (alleged, controversial) have to do with "complaining about the specifics of a court order"?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- mosdl 1y agoThey only care about rights when it helps them.
- juped 1y agoI think you meritlessly flamed someone when you should have flagged their comment and moved on. Copyright isn't remotely relevant to this litigation hold at all, after all, why start a fight over it?
- rasengan 1y agoThe internet is the battle of the narratives.
- mmooss 1y agoPeople here advocate for private use, not profit-making corporate use.
- ivape 1y agoIn retrospect, Bezos did the smartest thing by buying the Washington Post. In retrospect, Google did a great thing by working on a deal with Reddit. Content repositories/creators are going to sue these LLM companies in the West until they make licensing agreements. If I were OpenAI, I'd work hard to spend the money they raised to literally buyout as many of these outlets as possible. How much could the NYT back catalog be worth? Just buy it, ask the Saudis.