Microsoft, OpenAI sued for copyright infringement by nonfiction book authors in class action claim::The new copyright infringement lawsuit against Microsoft and OpenAI comes a week after The New York Times filed a similar complaint in New York.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No. I really do think that all AI output should be required to be copyleft if there’s any copyleft in the training dataset (edit for clarity: unless there’s also something else with an incompatible license in it, in which case the output isn’t usable at all – but protecting copyleft is the part I care about).

      • General_Effort@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Huh. Obviously, you don’t believe that a copyleft license should trump other licenses (or lack thereof). So, what are you hoping this to achieve?

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Obviously, you don’t believe that a copyleft license should trump other licenses (or lack thereof)

          I’m not sure what you mean. No licenses “trump” any other license; that’s not how it works. You can only make something that’s a derivative work of multiple differently-licensed things if the terms of all the licenses allow it, something the FSF calls “compatibility.” Obviously, a proprietary license can never be compatible with a copyleft one, so what I’m hoping to achieve is a ruling that says any AI whose training dataset included both copyleft and proprietary items has completely legally-unusable output. (And also that any AI whose training dataset includes copyleft items along with permissively-licensed and public domain ones must have its output be copyleft.)