←back to thread

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

(www.theregister.com)
451 points croes | 1 comments | 12 May 25 09:49 UTC | HN request time: 0.2s | source
Show context
prvc ◴[12 May 25 12:28 UTC] No.43962193[source]▶
The released draft report seems merely to be a litany of copyright holder complaints repeated verbatim, with little depth of reasoning to support the conclusions it makes.
replies(4): >>43962324 #>>43962424 #>>43962648 #>>43962893 #
bgwalter ◴[12 May 25 12:59 UTC] No.43962424[source]▶
The required reasoning is not very deep though: If an AI reads 100 scientific papers and churns out a new one, it is plagiarism.

If a savant has perfect recall, remembers text perfectly and rearranges that text to create a marginally new text, he'd be sued for breach of copyright.

Only large corporations get away with it.

replies(9): >>43962554 #>>43962560 #>>43962638 #>>43962665 #>>43962744 #>>43962820 #>>43963108 #>>43963228 #>>43963944 #
scraptor ◴[12 May 25 13:15 UTC] No.43962554[source]▶
Plagiarism is not an issue of copyright law, it's an entirely separate system of rules maintained by academia. The US Copyright Office has no business having opinions about it. If a AI^W human reads 100 papers and then churns out a new one this is usually called research.
replies(5): >>43962756 #>>43962757 #>>43963247 #>>43963863 #>>43966801 #
1. anigbrowl ◴[12 May 25 19:46 UTC] No.43966801[source]▶
You were supposed to keep reading past the first sentence, instead of trying to refute the first thing you saw that you found disagreeable. By doing so, you missed the point that plagiarism is substantively different from copyright infringement.