On the internet, nobody knows you are Australian.

also https://lemm.ee/u/MargotRobbie

To tell you the truth, I don’t know who I am either. Somebody sincere, perhaps.

But if you ever read this one day, I hope that you are as proud of me, as I am of the person I imagined you to be.

  • 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle




  • But what an LLM does meets your listed definition of transformative as well, it indeed provides additional value that can’t be derive from the original, because everything it outputs is completely original but similar in style to the original that you can’t use to reconstitute the original work, in other words, similar to fan work, which is also why the current ML models, text2text or text2image, are called “transformers”. Again, works similar in style to the original cannot and should not be considered copyright infringement, because that’s a can of worm nobody actually wants to open, and the courts has been very consistent on that.

    So, I would find it hard to believe that if there is a Supreme Court ruling which finds digitalizing copyrighted material in a database is fair use and not derivative work, that they wouldn’t consider digitalizing copyrighted material in a database with very lossy compression (that’s a more accurate description of what LLMs are, please give this a read if you have time) fair use as well. Of course, with the current Roberts court, there is always the chance that weird things can happen, but I would be VERY surprised.

    There is also the previous ruling that raw transformer output cannot be copyrighted, but that’s beyond the scope of this post for now.

    My problem with LLM outputs is mostly that they are just bad writing, and I’ve been pretty critical against “”“Open”""AI elsewhere on Lemmy, but I don’t see Siverman’s case going anywhere.


  • She’s going to lose the lawsuit. It’s an open and shut case.

    “Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc.” is the precedent case, in which the US Supreme Court established that transformative digitalization of copyrighted material inside a search engine constitutes as fair use, and text used for training LLMs are even more transformative than book digitalization since it is near impossible to reconstitute the original work barring extreme overtraining.

    You will have to understand why styles can’t and should not be able to be copyrighted, because that would honestly be a horrifying prospect for art.