←back to thread

US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

(www.theregister.com)
451 points croes | 4 comments | 12 May 25 09:49 UTC | HN request time: 0.669s | source
Show context
mattxxx ◴[12 May 25 13:58 UTC] No.43962976[source]▶
Well, firing someone for this is super weird. It seems like an attempt to censor an interpretation of the law that:

1. Criticizes a highly useful technology 2. Matches a potentially-outdated, strict interpretation of copyright law

My opinion: I think using copyrighted data to train models for sure seems classically illegal. Despite that, Humans can read a book, get inspiration, and write a new book and not be litigated against. When I look at the litany of derivative fantasy novels, it's obvious they're not all fully independent works.

Since AI is and will continue to be so useful and transformative, I think we just need to acknowledge that our laws did not accomodate this use-case, then we should change them.

replies(19): >>43963017 #>>43963125 #>>43963168 #>>43963214 #>>43963243 #>>43963311 #>>43963423 #>>43963517 #>>43963612 #>>43963721 #>>43963943 #>>43964079 #>>43964280 #>>43964365 #>>43964448 #>>43964562 #>>43965792 #>>43965920 #>>43976732 #
1. ceejayoz ◴[12 May 25 14:38 UTC] No.43963517[source]▶
> Despite that, Humans can read a book, get inspiration, and write a new book and not be litigated against.

You're still not gonna be allowed to commercially publish "Hairy Plotter and the Philosophizer's Rock".

replies(2): >>43963660 #>>43966769 #
2. WesolyKubeczek ◴[12 May 25 14:48 UTC] No.43963660[source]▶
No, but you are most likely allowed to commercially publish "Hairy Potter and the Philosophizer's Rock", a story about a prehistoric community. The hero is literally a hairy potter who steals a rock from a lazy deadbeat dude who is pestering the rest of the group with his weird ideas.
replies(1): >>43964853 #
3. zelphirkalt ◴[12 May 25 16:31 UTC] No.43964853[source]▶
Not sure what you are getting at?
4. anigbrowl ◴[12 May 25 19:40 UTC] No.43966769[source]▶
You are if it's parody, cf 'Bored of the Rings'.