←back to thread

394 points pyman | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | 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 #
6gvONxR4sf7o ◴[] No.44491944[source]
You skipped quotes about the other important side:

> But Alsup drew a firm line when it came to piracy.

> "Anthropic had no entitlement to use pirated copies for its central library," Alsup wrote. "Creating a permanent, general-purpose library was not itself a fair use excusing Anthropic's piracy."

That is, he ruled that

- buying, physically cutting up, physically digitizing books, and using them for training is fair use

- pirating the books for their digital library is not fair use.

replies(6): >>44492103 #>>44492512 #>>44492665 #>>44493580 #>>44493641 #>>44495079 #
1. icelancer ◴[] No.44495079[source]
> You skipped quotes about the other important side:

He said:

> It was always somewhat obvious that pirating a library would be copyright infringement.

??