4 ms·
> then surely a model distilling another model is transformative and fair use. Yes it is, in the legal/copyright sense of fair use. That's why they ban it in t
by DonsDiscountGas 1mo ago
> then surely a model distilling another model is transformative and fair use.
Yes it is, in the legal/copyright sense of fair use. That's why they ban it in their TOS. Which customers agree to when signing up for the service.
- david-gpu 1mo agoHow long until books come with TOS, then?
- ozlikethewizard 1mo agoDamn now im looking forward to the day when books end up like physical game disks, where somehow you're not buying the book just a license to it, what a boring dystopia this is lol
- JustAnUserNameF 1mo agoAs usual, Stallman already predicted this: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
- phoghed 1mo agoDarryl W. Perry predicted this: https://www.c-span.org/clip/road-to-the-white-house-2016/user-clip-a-licence-to-make-toast-in-your-own-damn-toaster/4713898 https://www.c-span.org/clip/road-to-the-white-house-2016/use...
- jtbayly 1mo agoHave you ever heard of Amazon? Kindle?
- 3eb7988a1663 1mo agoCommon for college textbooks to have some digital-only component accessed with a one-time key inside the cover. Sometimes time-limited to a single semester.
- steve1977 1mo agoMany of them do already and have for decades
- david-gpu 1mo agoCan you please provide a specific example?
- delecti 1mo agoPick up nearly any published book. Turn to the ~3rd page. There will be either a whole page, or sometimes the second half of a page, dedicated to a copyright notice. Very nearly every published book I've ever seen has that identical page. This isn't a recent thing. I grabbed my copy of Diaspora by Greg Egan and opposite the table of contents is a page that starts like this: Copyright (C) 1998, 2015 by Greg Egan First Night Shade Books edition 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without the express written consent of the publisher, blah blah (it felt very ironic to transcribe that bit in particular to make this point)
- paradox460 1mo agoThey kind of do. There's usually a big scary notice on the imprint page scolding you for even thinking about piracy
- david-gpu 1mo agoWe are talking of TOS independent of copyright law.
- BobbyTables2 1mo agoI suspect first-sale doctrine doesn’t allow such. However, if content is “licensed” instead of “sold” …
- ACCount37 1mo agoSo far, we have one ruling that says "model distillation by vendor A from vendor B with the intent to use the results to compete with vendor B in vendor B's domain is not fair use". Which makes a degree of sense. It's possible that distillation for other reasons, with no intent to harm the vendor you distill from, would have been ruled to be fair use. But in law, intent matters.
- ipython 1mo agoWhat was the intent of the original ai companies (anthropic, OpenAI, etc) when they mass-distilled the entire internet to create their training data set?
- dotancohen 1mo agoOne could make arguments for OpenAI and Anthropic. But Google Search displays AI results above the SERP - clearly in competition with them. No premise or excuse there.
- trollbridge 1mo agoMy website’s TOS says not to use it to train AI without permission, yet my website is in the training set of all the big models. So… my TOS doesn’t matter, but theirs does?
- foxglacier 1mo agoYes - yours is just some optional text nobody reads or understands and is probably not legally required to adhere to. Theirs is a contract signed by their customer who they know did understand it.
- trollbridge 1mo agoInteresting. So what makes theirs not “optional text nobody reads or understands”?
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 1mo ago> what makes theirs not “optional text nobody reads or understands”? You accept it. You pay consideration for it. If your website has a TOS dickover, that requires someone attest with their legal name and pay you $1, yes, it may be enforceable under some circumstances.
- trollbridge 1mo agoI think you’re failing to understand copyright law. Without a licence you can’t wget -r a website and make copies of the materials on it, alter them, and so forth.
- blks 1mo agoAccessing the site may already mean that you agree to TOS. Also if you don’t see an explicit copyright terms on some text on the internet it doesn’t mean that it’s public domain. Same as checking a checkbox. Text being small and somewhere is not an excuse for a corporation to steal and sell other people’s work.
- cornholio 1mo agoSo what you are saying is that, if I can somehow get my hands on a copy of Fable, it's fair use to use it to train any models and serve those, since I'm no longer bound by the TOS of the service provider? Asking for all Anthropic employees who dream big.