←back to thread

Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

(www.nytimes.com)
989 points acomjean | 1 comments | 05 Sep 25 19:52 UTC | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
petralithic ◴[05 Sep 25 20:54 UTC] No.45143482[source]▶
This is sad for open source AI, piracy for the purpose of model training should also be fair use because otherwise only the big companies who can afford to pay off publishers like Anthropic will be able to do so. There is no way to buy billions of books just for model training, it simply can't happen.
replies(9): >>45143523 #>>45143780 #>>45143876 #>>45144861 #>>45145004 #>>45145076 #>>45146993 #>>45147328 #>>45148584 #
dbalatero ◴[05 Sep 25 20:58 UTC] No.45143523[source]▶
This implies training models is some sort of right.
replies(3): >>45143539 #>>45143739 #>>45147172 #
vessenes ◴[06 Sep 25 06:45 UTC] No.45147172[source]▶
Curious: are you trolling? Or do you really think doing math shouldn’t be a priori allowed to humans?
replies(1): >>45151043 #
dbalatero ◴[06 Sep 25 17:11 UTC] No.45151043[source]▶
Do you seriously think it's a matter of doing math in a vacuum? The issue is pirating books, using them as inputs to math which is then resold as an LLM without compensation to the authors who have clearly copyrighted material. I can't tell if _you're_ trolling.
replies(1): >>45155125 #
1. petralithic ◴[07 Sep 25 03:21 UTC] No.45155125[source]▶
> The issue is pirating books, using them as inputs to math which is then resold as an LLM without compensation to the authors who have clearly copyrighted material.

No one seems to be able to explain what exactly the issue is here. How are authors harmed by LLMs (where such harm is often used to understand the range of copyright in lawsuits)? I don't see anyone replacing authors and their works, such as JK Rowling being harmed just because people can output Harry Potter esque texts. And if that's the case, well, fan fiction has been around for a long time, with no LLMs in its writing.