Lawsuit Against Meta and ChatGPT Firm OpenAI for Copyright Infringement…

[Ingomike]

Fascinating legal concept, the act of feeding data to AI violates the rights of copyright holders as they are claiming they used content without permission to train artificial intelligence language models.

Not a Sarah Silverman fan but this could get interesting.

Sarah Silverman Sues Facebook Parent Company Meta and ChatGPT Firm OpenAI for Copyright Infringement

Comedian Sarah Silverman is suing Facebook parent company Meta as well as ChatGPT firm OpenAI for copyright infringement, claiming they used her content without permission to train artificial intelligence language models.

www.breitbart.com

 

[Ingomike]

Rampant ‘Shadow Libraries’ Drive Calls for Anti-Piracy Action

“Shadow libraries,” also referred to as “pirate libraries,” make millions of books available for permanent download at minimal or no cost, often directly infringing copyrights held by authors and publishers and cutting into profits for the billion-dollar industry. Limited legal avenues have...

news.bloomberglaw.com

 

[HoughMade]

This is an interesting angle. I'm no intellectual property expert, but using someone's copyrighted work in this way without specific permission and compensation sure sounds like infringement to me.

If I had to guess, eventually we will end up with a kind of ASCAP or BMI for published works that collects licensing fees and distributes royalties.

 

[Ingomike]

This is an interesting angle. I'm no intellectual property expert, but using someone's copyrighted work in this way without specific permission and compensation sure sounds like infringement to me.

If I had to guess, eventually we will end up with a kind of ASCAP or BMI for published works that collects licensing fees and distributes royalties.

Data is stolen by xyz company that is offshore of the US, then abc a US based company buys it; would that be exculpatory for abc because they did not actually take it? The link in post two seems to believe it will be tough because the data is offshore but it seems to me the companies actually using the data and being sued are US based…

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Data is stolen by xyz company that is offshore of the US, then abc a US based company buys it; would that be exculpatory for abc because they did not actually take it? The link in post two seems to believe it will be tough because the data is offshore but it seems to me the companies actually using the data and being sued are US based…

Seems like they would treat it like "receiving stolen goods"...

 

[HoughMade]

Data is stolen by xyz company that is offshore of the US, then abc a US based company buys it; would that be exculpatory for abc because they did not actually take it? The link in post two seems to believe it will be tough because the data is offshore but it seems to me the companies actually using the data and being sued are US based…

Copyright infringement isn't like stolen data. If you use it improperly (without permission/royalty), you are liable. Everything that came in between is irrelevant.

As for stolen data, liability depends upon knowledge of the illegality of it being obtained. Doesn't matter where an intermediary is. If offshore company steals data, there may not be jurisdiction over it in this country, but anyone who uses it knowingly can be liable. There may even be liability if there was not actual knowledge that it was stolen. The data going out of the country and then being bought domestically just expands the number of entities that may be liable. It doesn't insulate anyone.