#AI#GenerativeAI#ChatGPT#OpenAI#Copyright#FairUse#IP: "Two authors have filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, the company behind the artificial intelligence tool ChatGPT, claiming that the organisation breached copyright law by “training” its model on novels without the permission of authors.
Mona Awad, whose books include Bunny and 13 Ways of Looking at a Fat Girl, and Paul Tremblay, author of The Cabin at the End of the World, filed the class action complaint to a San Francisco federal court last week.
ChatGPT allows users to ask questions and type commands into a chatbot and responds with text that resembles human language patterns. The model underlying ChatGPT is trained with data that is publicly available on the internet.
Yet, Awad and Tremblay believe their books, which are copyrighted, were unlawfully “ingested” and “used to train” ChatGPT because the chatbot generated “very accurate summaries” of the novels, according to the complaint. Sample summaries are included in the lawsuit as exhibits."
"An innovation that propelled Britain to become the world’s leading iron exporter during the Industrial Revolution was appropriated from an 18th-century Jamaican foundry, historical records suggest.
Now, an analysis of correspondence, shipping records and contemporary newspaper reports reveals the innovation was first developed by 76 (enslaved) black Jamaican metallurgists at an ironworks near Morant Bay, Jamaica."
If it ever becomes an #IP issue for the #FediVerse, I have prior art on at least some of their moderation infrastructure proposals, dating back to public blog posts in 2018.
📢 Join us for the #IP Fundamentals presentation on Wednesday 19 July, a series of seminars and activities to empower you in IP protection and commercialisation. Participate in the #survey at http://quicklink.anu.edu.au/sjxu to help us tailor resources to your needs. #ANU#research
#AI#GenerativeAI#News#Media#Journalism#Copyright#IP: "The world’s biggest tech companies are in talks with leading media outlets to strike landmark deals over the use of news content to train artificial intelligence technology.
OpenAI, Google, Microsoft and Adobe have met news executives in recent months to discuss copyright issues around their AI products such as text chatbots and image generators, according to several people familiar with the talks.
#interoperability: can we make it happen, despite #BigTech interests in status quo, whether it be on #IP front or other? Can’t wait to discuss this tomorrow with
Doctorow @pluralistic
The enforcement of copyright law is really simple.
If you were a kid who used Napster in the early 2000s to download the latest album by The Offspring or Destiny's Child, because you couldn't afford the CD, then you need to go to court! And potentially face criminal sanctions or punitive damages to the RIAA for each song you download, because you're an evil pirate! You wouldn't steal a car! Creators must be paid!
If you created educational videos on YouTube in the 2010s, and featured a video or audio clip, then even if it's fair use, and even if it's used to make a legitimate point, you're getting demonetised. That's assuming your videos don't disappear or get shadow banned or your account isn't shut entirely. Oh, and good luck finding your way through YouTube's convoluted DMCA process! All creators are equal in deserving pay, but some are more equal than others!
And if you're a corporation with a market capitalisation of US$1.5 trillion (Google/Alphabet) or US$2.3 billion (Microsoft), then you can freely use everyone's intellectual property to train your generative AI bots. Suddenly creators don't deserve to be paid a cent.
Apparently, an individual downloading a single file is like stealing a car. But a trillion-dollar corporation stealing every car is just good business.
Which makes it even worse as they basically now squat that and prevent everyone from making good new works unless the few cases were their IP has also lapsed...
Anything else is a gross violation of social contract given the fact that noone can make content past their death, so 70 years postmortal IP protection can only serve corporations and license administrations and noone else.
"30 years ago this week…something called the World Wide Web launched into the public domain…#CERN owned Berners-Lee's invention and…had the option to license [it] out…for profit. But Berners-Lee believed that keeping the web as open as possible would help it grow…[He] eventually convinced CERN to release the World Wide Web into the #PublicDomain without any #patents or fees."
I'm very glad to see farmers win the right to repair their tractors. It's a win for consumers against bogus #IP objections from manufacturers. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64206913