Two authors sued OpenAI, accusing the company of violating copyright law. They say OpenAI used their work to train ChatGPT without their consent.
Two authors sued OpenAI, accusing the company of violating copyright law. They say OpenAI used their work to train ChatGPT without their consent.
The AI models (not specifically OpenAI’s models) do not contain the original material they were trained on. Just like the creators of Undertale consumed the games they were inspired by into their brain, and learned from them, so did the AI learn from the material it was trained on and learned how to make similar yet distinctly different output. You do not need a permissive license to learn from something once it has been publicized.
You can’t just put your artwork up on a wall and then demand every person who looks at it to not learn from it while simultaneously allowing them to look at it because you have a license that says learning from it is not allowed - that’s insane and hence why (as far as I know) no legal system acknowledges that as a legal defense.
That’s utterly ridiculous. Even ignoring that OpenAI keeps private the training dataset they use to produce their GPT models–almost certainly because if they did publish it, it would be an open confession that they stole the content of virtually everybody on the internet for their profit–if the training datasets don’t preserve the original material they were trained on, how can someone ask ChatGPT to act as an ebook reader and get it to print the first few pages of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone?