←back to thread

393 points pyman | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.207s | source
Show context
dehrmann ◴[] No.44491718[source]
The important parts:

> Alsup ruled that Anthropic's use of copyrighted books to train its AI models was "exceedingly transformative" and qualified as fair use

> "All Anthropic did was replace the print copies it had purchased for its central library with more convenient space-saving and searchable digital copies for its central library — without adding new copies, creating new works, or redistributing existing copies"

It was always somewhat obvious that pirating a library would be copyright infringement. The interesting findings here are that scanning and digitizing a library for internal use is OK, and using it to train models is fair use.

replies(6): >>44491820 #>>44491944 #>>44492844 #>>44494100 #>>44494132 #>>44494944 #
1. sershe ◴[] No.44494132[source]
Im not sure how I feel about what anthropic did on merit as a matter of scale, but from a legalistic standpoint how is it different from using the book to train the meat model in my head? I could even learn bits by heart and quote them in context.