←back to thread

430 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 #
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 #
throwawayffffas ◴[] No.44492103[source]
So all they have to do is go and buy a copy of each book they pirated. They will have ceased and desisted.
replies(3): >>44492200 #>>44492352 #>>44493451 #
superfrank ◴[] No.44492200[source]
I'm trying to find the quote, but I'm pretty sure the judge specifically said that going and buying the book after the fact won't absolve them of liability. He said that for the books they pirated they broke the law and should stand trial for that and they cannot go back and un-break in by buying a copy now.

Found it: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/federal-judge-rules-c...

> “That Anthropic later bought a copy of a book it earlier stole off the internet will not absolve it of liability for the theft,” [Judge] Alsup wrote, “but it may affect the extent of statutory damages.”

replies(4): >>44492716 #>>44492936 #>>44493820 #>>44493889 #
freejazz ◴[] No.44492936[source]
They also argued that they in no way could ever actually license all the materials they ingested
replies(1): >>44493194 #
dmd ◴[] No.44493194[source]
I love this argument so much. "But judge, there's no way I could ever afford to buy those jewels, so stealing them must be OK."
replies(1): >>44493585 #
AnthonyMouse ◴[] No.44493585[source]
The argument is more along the lines of, negotiating with millions of individuals each over a single copy of a work would cause the transaction costs to exceed the payments, and that kind of efficiency loss is the sort of thing fair use exists to prevent. It's not socially beneficial for the law to require you to create $2 in deadweight loss in order to transfer $1, and the cost to the author of not selling a single additional copy is not the thing they were really objecting to.
replies(6): >>44493769 #>>44493884 #>>44495038 #>>44495745 #>>44495819 #>>44496146 #
homebrewer ◴[] No.44495819[source]
I used to order books in English from the US before shipping costs became prohibitive and the cost of shipping the book went to about twice to thrice the cost of the book itself. Is it fair use for me to download books from Anna's Archive now considering that books in English are not available in my region through other means (including the vast majority of ebooks)?

Rhetorical question, we all know that me reading books is not "transformative" so it won't be considered fair use for me to yoink them (transformative as in transforming more damage to the society at large into more money for the already rich).

replies(2): >>44496308 #>>44496931 #
1. HelloImSteven ◴[] No.44496931[source]
In the U.S. at least (obviously not the same everywhere), fair use doesn’t necessarily require your work to be transformative. It’s one of several aspects that gets considered, albeit a fairly significant one in many cases. Downloading books/research articles/pirated works in general wouldn’t be fair use as the purpose of the act (obtaining a book to read) directly impacts the market for the work (selling books). There could still exceptions in some cases, mostly related to teaching I’d imagine.