How copyright lawsuits could kill OpenAI
www.vox.com
The New York Times v. OpenAI, explained.

A New York Times copyright lawsuit could kill OpenAI::A list of authors and entertainers are also suing the tech company for damages that could total in the billions.

  • Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish
    204·
    10 months ago

    This would bring up the cost of entry for making a model and nothing more. OpenAI will buy the data if they have too and so will google. The money will only go to the owners of the New York Times and its shareholders, none of the journalists who will be let go in the coming years will see a dime.

    We must keep the entry into the AI game as low as possible or the only two players will be Microsoft and Google. And as our economy becomes increasingly AI driven, this will cement them owning it.

    Pragmatism or slavery, these are the two options.

      • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        12·
        10 months ago

        He’s not arguing for OpenAI, but for the rest of us. AI is a public technology, but we’re on the verge of losing our ability to participate due to things like this and the megacorps’ attempts at regulatory capture. Which they might just get. Their campaign against AI is a lot like governments’ attempts to destroy encryption. Support open source development, It’s our only chance. Their AI will never work for us. John Carmack put it best.

        Fuck "Open"AI, fuck Microsoft. Pragmatism or slavery.

          • Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish
            32·
            10 months ago

            If you want to know my personal political stance, I think every company with more than 50 or so employees should be owned by the state. I’m for the dismantling of the stock market and the owner caste. I’m also a realist and understand those things won’t come to pass anytime soon. OpenAI will remain and they will happily eat all the fines if it guarantees them a monopoly.

            I wasn’t playing devil’s advocate. My point is these legislation only help companies like OpenAI while bringing no benefit whatsoever to any of us.

            There are also ways to hold giant megacorporations to a different set of standards than independent developers.

            Yes but that isn’t what is being currently proposed, is it?

              • Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish
                42·
                10 months ago

                I never claimed to be a copyright lawyer and there is literally no other copyright discussion except the ones pertaining to AI. I touched on my ideals because you were implying I was pro big business.

                I always try to have a reasonable discussion with you but you always end up writing these kinds of comments while never adressing my actual arguments. Have a good day bro.

              • Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish
                31·
                10 months ago

                You edited your comment after I responded. This is what you originally posted:

                "That’s a pretty good trick, trying to conflate regulation of OpenAI with other impossible ideals you claim to hold, and drawing a hard line between that and your own suggestion: to let OpenAI win.

                I feel sorry for your clients.

                (By the way, Grimy claims to be a copyright lawyer, but for some reason he only crawls out of the woodwork when OpenAI is discussed. Sam Altman himself seems like a less biased source for how AI should be treated.)"