[stuffoverflow]

This whole case is even more stupid when you take in to account how NYT's paywall is implemented. Anyone can bypass it just by refreshing the page and stopping it immediately after contents become visible.

I don't know what ChatGPT uses to browse web but it wouldn't surprise me if it repeated stuff from those paid articles because it uses wget or something similar that doesn't support js and therefore the paywalls weren't effective.

[howard941]

Didn't this stop working about 6 months ago when it added a delay around 4 paragraphs in saying it was checking your IP address before sending the rest of the article?

[wvenable]

The paywall news sites want to have their cake and eat it to -- they want web crawlers, like Google, to read the full contents of the article but hide it from site visitors.

If they simply put all their content behind a paywall entirely and effectively then this would be a non-issue.

If ChatGPT is getting this content it's literally because they allow it.

[gruez]

>The paywall news sites want to have their cake and eat it to -- they want web crawlers, like Google, to read the full contents of the article but hide it from site visitors.

There's nothing contradictory about this? Plenty of companies give free access to journalist/reviewers/influencers, with the hope that they'd draw in paying customers. Wanting to only give free access to certain people isn't "want to have their cake and eat it to". It's standard business practice and well within the rights of publishers/rights holders to do.

[nhinck2]

I mean you can also walk out of a store without paying before they can stop you. Doesn't change the nature of the offence.

[pxc]

The point is that there's no need to resort to using something like ChatGPT to do avoid the paywall, so most people who want to avoid the paywall wouldn't bother with using ChatGPT to do it.