3 ms·
That may be relevant in the NYT vs OpenAI case, since NYT was supposedly able to reproduce entire articles in ChatGPT. Here Llama is predicting one sentence at
by paxys 1y ago
That may be relevant in the NYT vs OpenAI case, since NYT was supposedly able to reproduce entire articles in ChatGPT. Here Llama is predicting one sentence at a time when fed the previous one, with 50% accuracy, for 42% of the book. That can easily be written off as fair use.
- gpm 1y agoI'm pretty sure books.google.com does the exact same with much better reliability... and the US courts found that to be fair use. (Agreeing with parent comment)
- pclmulqdq 1y agoIf there is a circuit split between it and NYT vs OAI, the Google Books ruling (in the famously tech-friendly ninth circuit) may also find itself under review.
- echelon 1y ago> Here Llama is predicting one sentence at a time when fed the previous one, with 50% accuracy, for 42% of the book. That can easily be written off as fair use. Is that fair use, or is that compression of the verbatim source?
- TeMPOraL 1y agoIt doesn't let you recover the text without knowing it in advance, so no. You can't in particular iterate it sentence by sentence; you're unlikely to go past sentence 2 this way before it starts giving you back it's own ideas. The whole thing is a sleigh of hand, basically. There's 42% of the book there, in tiny pieces, which you can only identify if you know what you're looking for. The model itself does not.
- gamblor956 1y agoThat can easily be written off as fair use. No, it really couldn't. In fact, it's very persuasive evidence that Llama is straight up violating copyright. It would be one thing to be able to "predict" a paragraph or two. It's another thing entirely to be able to predict 42% of a book that is several hundred pages long.
- reedciccio 1y agoIs it Llama violating the "copyright" or is it the researcher pushing it to do so?
- lern_too_spel 1y agoIf you distribute a zip file of the book, are you violating copyright, or is it the person who unzips it?
- TeMPOraL 1y agoIf you walk through the N-gram database with a copy of Harry Potter in hand and observe that for N=7, you can find any piece of it in the database with above-average frequency, does that mean N-gram database is violating copyright?
- gamblor956 1y agoIf the database is sharing those pieces, it might be yes. Copyright takes into account the use for such the copying is done. Commercial use will almost always be treated as not fair use, with limited exceptions.
- TeMPOraL 1y agoI'd say no, because you can't reasonably access and order those pieces without already having the work at your side to use as a reference.
- lern_too_spel 1y agoNot unless you can reproduce large portions of Harry Potter verbatim from the database. If the 7-grams are taken only from Harry Potter, that is very likely.
- gamblor956 1y agoYou are. Copyright is quite literally about the right to control the creation and distribution of copies. The creation of the unzipped file is not treated as a separate copy so the recipient would not be violating copyright just by unzipping the file you provided.
- int_19h 1y agoIf it can predict the next sentence reliably, that sentence then becomes part of the context, so if you just continue inference, it would eventually produce the entire text verbatim, no?