4 ms·

No? AI companies have been hit with court cases for that. Google, xAI, Open AI, and Meta at least.

quentindanjou 5mo ago
Were these from the same high-profile publishers? What was the judgment? Seems that their domains are still active. Why is there a difference in judgment here?
- dylan604 5mo ago
  > Why is there a difference in judgment here? $$$$$$$
- gruez 5mo ago
  >Why is there a difference in judgment here? For one, they actually bothered to sent lawyers rather than getting hit with a default judgement.
- smallerize 5mo ago
  Anthropic's judgement is currently $1.5 billion in its piracy case. The judge is reviewing it. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/05/authors-fight-for-higher-payouts-from-anthropics-1-5b-copyright-settlement/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/05/authors-fight-fo... The others are still ongoing.
dylan604 5mo ago
So anyone with deep enough pockets can do it. However, just because you receive a fine does not mean that you "can't" do it. You've already done it, got caught, now a fine. It does not mean that the LLM model has to be tossed out and destroyed with a new version trained up without that data. It just means can't is a very stupid word to imply here.
- gruez 5mo ago
  >You've already done it, got caught, now a fine. It does not mean that the LLM model has to be tossed out and destroyed with a new version trained up without that data. It just means can't is a very stupid word to imply here. Yes, because most courts have ruled that training is legal as long as the source material was acquired legally. The AI companies were made to pay for the wrongs they did when acquiring the books, but it makes little sense to destroy all works that were built off the infringement, when they would be in the clear if they paid $15 (or whatever) for each book. It'd be like you torrenting college textbooks and getting caught, and then the book publisher demanding that you start over your college degree from scratch.
- smallerize 5mo ago
  Yeah? These were published books and the main complaint was that they had not paid for them. If they pay up, the problem is solved. Anyone with enough money to buy all those books up front could do the same without the lawsuit.
  - dylan604 5mo ago
    That's not always how things work. If you attempt to build something without a permit, the inspector will break out a can of spray paint and mark materials so you cannot resell or use them after getting a permit. That's on top of any fines. If you do get a permit, you have to buy all of that material again. Building a fence too high will see you having to take down that fence. Some places not in tech actually have ways of dealing with "disruptors"

Were these from the same high-profile publishers? What was the judgment? Seems that their domains are still active. Why is there a difference in judgment here?

dylan604 5mo ago
> Why is there a difference in judgment here? $$$$$$$
gruez 5mo ago
>Why is there a difference in judgment here? For one, they actually bothered to sent lawyers rather than getting hit with a default judgement.
smallerize 5mo ago
Anthropic's judgement is currently $1.5 billion in its piracy case. The judge is reviewing it. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/05/authors-fight-for-higher-payouts-from-anthropics-1-5b-copyright-settlement/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/05/authors-fight-fo... The others are still ongoing.

dylan604 5mo ago

So anyone with deep enough pockets can do it. However, just because you receive a fine does not mean that you "can't" do it. You've already done it, got caught, now a fine. It does not mean that the LLM model has to be tossed out and destroyed with a new version trained up without that data. It just means can't is a very stupid word to imply here.

gruez 5mo ago
>You've already done it, got caught, now a fine. It does not mean that the LLM model has to be tossed out and destroyed with a new version trained up without that data. It just means can't is a very stupid word to imply here. Yes, because most courts have ruled that training is legal as long as the source material was acquired legally. The AI companies were made to pay for the wrongs they did when acquiring the books, but it makes little sense to destroy all works that were built off the infringement, when they would be in the clear if they paid $15 (or whatever) for each book. It'd be like you torrenting college textbooks and getting caught, and then the book publisher demanding that you start over your college degree from scratch.
smallerize 5mo ago
Yeah? These were published books and the main complaint was that they had not paid for them. If they pay up, the problem is solved. Anyone with enough money to buy all those books up front could do the same without the lawsuit.
- dylan604 5mo ago
  That's not always how things work. If you attempt to build something without a permit, the inspector will break out a can of spray paint and mark materials so you cannot resell or use them after getting a permit. That's on top of any fines. If you do get a permit, you have to buy all of that material again. Building a fence too high will see you having to take down that fence. Some places not in tech actually have ways of dealing with "disruptors"