3 ms·

Google scanned many books quite a while ago, probably way more than LibGen. Are they good to use them for training?

• mips_avatar 1y ago
  I imagine the problem there is they primarily scanned library books so I doubt they have the same copyright protections here as if they bought them
• johanyc 1y ago
  If they legally purchased them I dont think why not. IIRC they did borrow from libraries so probably not every book in Google Books
  • greensoap 1y ago
    Anthropic legally purchased the books it used to train its model according to the judge. And the judge said that was fine. Anthropic also downloaded books from a pirate site and the judge said that was bad -- even though the judge also said they didn't use those books for training....
• xnx 1y ago
  All those books were loaned by a library or purchased.
• ortusdux 1y ago
  They litigated this a while ago and my understanding was that they were able to claim fair use, but I'm no expert. What I'm wondering is if they, or others, have trained models on pirated content that has flowed through their networks?
  • jazzyjackson 1y ago
    Books.Google.Com was deemed fair use because it only shows previews, not full downloads. Internet Archive is still under litigation iirc besides having owned a physical copy of every book they ever scanned (and keeping a copy in their warehouses) they let people read the whole thing. I’m surprised Google hasn’t hit its competitors harder with the fact that they actually got permission to scan books from its partner libraries and Facebook and OpenAI just torrented books2/books3, but I guess they have aligned incentive to benefit from a legal framework that doesn’t look to closely at how you went about collecting source material