←back to thread

397 points pyman | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.411s | 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. MaxPock ◴[] No.44494944[source]
How times change .They wanted to lock up Aaron Schwartz for life for essentially doing the same thing Anthropic is doing.
replies(1): >>44495556 #
2. m4x ◴[] No.44495556[source]
Aaron Swartz wanted to provide the public with open access to paywalled journal articles, while Anthropic want to use other people's copyrighted material to train their own private models that they restrict access to via a paywall. It's wild (but unsurprising) that Aaron Swartz was prosecuted under the CFAA for this while Anthropic is allowed to become commercially successful