[dchichkov]

>> In the proposal, OpenAI also said the U.S. needs “a copyright strategy that promotes the freedom to learn” and on “preserving American AI models’ ability to learn from copyrighted material.”

Perhaps also symmetric "freedom to learn" from OpenAI models, with some provisions / naming convention? U.S. labs are limited in this way, while labs in China are not.

[taurath]

It still warps my brain, they’ve taken trillions of dollars of industry and made a product worth billions by stealing it. IP is practically the basis of the economy, and these models warp and obfuscate ownership of everything, like a giant reset button on who can hold knowledge. It wouldn’t be legal, or allowed if tech wasn't seen as the growth path of our economy. It’s a hell of a needle to thread and it’s unlikely that anyone will ever again be able to model from data so open.

[woah]

"IP" is a very new concept in our culture and completely absent in other cultures. It was invented to prevent verbatim reprints of books, but even so, the publishing industry existed for hundreds of years before then. It's been expanded greatly in the past 50 years.

Acting like copyright is some natural law of the universe that LLMs are upending simply because they can learn from written texts is silly.

If you want to argue that it should be radically expanded to the point that not only a work, but even the ideas and knowledge contained in that work should be censored and restricted, fine. But at least have the honesty to admit that this is a radical new expansion for a body of law that has already been radically expanded relatively recently.

[jsemrau]

Is it the same thing though? Even though Lord Of The Rings, the book, likely has been used to train the models you can't reproduce it. Nor can you make a derivative of it. Is it really the same comparison like "Simba the white lion" and "the lion king"?

https://abounaja.com/blog/intellectual-property-disputes

[EGreg]

Gearing up for a fight between the two major industries based on exploitative business models:

Copyright cartels (RIAA, MPAA) that monetized young artists without paying them much at all [1], vs the AI megalomaniacs who took all the work for free and used Kenyans at $2 an hour [2] so that they can raise "$7 trillion" for their AI infrastructure

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/LetsTalkMusic/comments/1fzyr0u/arti...

[2] https://time.com/6247678/openai-chatgpt-kenya-workers/

[Bjorkbat]

Can't believe I'm actually rooting for the copyright cartels in this fight.

But that does make me think, that in a sane society with a functional legislature I wouldn't have to pick a dog in this fight. I'd have have enough faith in lawmakers and the political process to pursue a path towards copyright reform that reigns in abuses from both AI companies and megacorp rightsholders

Alas, for now I'm hoping that aforementioned megacorps sue OpenAI into a painful lesson.

[blitzar]

I should have "freedom to learn" about any Tesla in the showroom, any F-35 I see laying around an airbase or the contents of anyone in the governments bank account.

[NoOn3]

According to this scheme, if you find a bug and can read the bank's data, then you can use it as you want.

[999900000999]

Can this extend to every kid sued by the record industry for downloading a few songs.

Have we all been transported to bizzaro land?

Different rules for billion dollar corps I guess.

[somenameforme]

Those cases did very poorly whenever they actually went to court (well at least also including the ones that were summarily dismissed by the courts, meaning they didn't technically make it to court). They were much more of a mafia style shakedown than an actual legal enforcement effort.

Same rules, but people are a lot less inclined to defend themselves because the cost of loss was seen as too high to even risk it.

[seanmcdirmid]

Chinese AI must implement socialist values by law, but law is a much more fluid fuzzy thing in China than in the USA (although the USA seems to be moving away from rule of law recently).

[sva_]

> Chinese AI must implement socialist values by law

I don't doubt it but am interested to read a source? I know the models can't talk about things like Tiananmen Square 1989, but what does 'implementing socialist values by law' look like?

[j-krieger]

So? US AI must implement US rules by law. AI models are heavily censored and tend to favor certain political viewpoints.

[sega_sai]

I like how this "freedom to learn" should apply to models, but not real people..

[TheSoftwareGuy]

It already applies to real people, doesn't it? I.e. if you read a book, you're not allowed to start printing and selling copies of that book without permission of the copyright owner, but if you learn something from that book you can use that knowledge, just like a model could.

[diego_sandoval]

I would assume that the request is for it to apply to models in the way that it currently applies to humans.

If a human buys a movie, he can watch it and learn about its contents, and then talk about those contents, and he can create a similar movie with a similar theme.

If OpenAI buys a movie and shows it to their model, it's unclear whether the model can talk about the contents of the movie and create a similar movie with a similar theme.

[voytec]

This is basically "allow us to steal others' IP". It's hard not to treat Altman like a common thief.

[DebtDeflation]

Even moreso, it only applies to initial model training by companies like OpenAI not other companies using those models to generate synthetic data to train their own models.

[kranke155]

Not only that

The model gets to use training data of all humans.

But if you use the model as training data OAI will say you’re infringing T&Cs

[binarymax]

Yeah it’s crazy. I also suspect they might not be confident in their defense from the NYT lawsuit - if they’re found in fault then it’s going to be trouble.

[IncreasePosts]

Are there certain books that federal law prevents you from reading? Which ones?

Maybe terrorist manuals and some child pornography, but what else?

[janalsncm]

The pod was good apart from starting/spreading the rumor that high numbers of “bill to Singapore” was evidence that China was circumventing GPU import bans.

[cadamsdotcom]

Can you expand your post and explain why?

[thrance]

They meant "freedom to learn [through backpropagation]" probably.

Companies like this were allowed to siphon the free work of billions of people over centuries and they still want more.