#rentism — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #rentism, aggregated by home.social.
-
Copyright has limitations and it's about time these limitations are respected. This is the wrong fight to start with AI companies. Copyright is just another form of rent extraction.
"In 2023, The New York Times sued OpenAI—and its largest investor, Microsoft—for "systematic and competitive infringement," accusing the companies of illegally using copyrighted material to develop their AI models. After other publishers filed their own lawsuits, the cases were consolidated last year in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
On Tuesday, the Justice Department sent a statement of interest arguing the Times' position is "inconsistent with basic copyright law principles" and could "severely hamper 'the Progress of Science and useful Arts.'" Training AI models on copyrighted material "in and of itself," the administration says, is not a violation of copyright laws.
Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976 outlines the conditions of "fair use," which allows anyone to use unlicensed copyright-protected works for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
The Justice Department contends that any use by the AI companies should be considered fair use for a transformative purpose. The Times has rejected this argument, declaring there is nothing transformative about using its content "without payment to create products that substitute for The Times and steal audiences away from it." The outlet claims that OpenAI's generative AI models "compete with and closely mimic the inputs used to train them," nullifying the fair use exemption for its copyrighted works.
Tori Noble, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, disagrees. She says training AI models on copyrighted works is "squarely what transformative use is." These are "general purpose tools" and "exactly the kind of creation that copyright is designed to foster," Noble adds."
-
Copyright has limitations and it's about time these limitations are respected. This is the wrong fight to start with AI companies. Copyright is just another form of rent extraction.
"In 2023, The New York Times sued OpenAI—and its largest investor, Microsoft—for "systematic and competitive infringement," accusing the companies of illegally using copyrighted material to develop their AI models. After other publishers filed their own lawsuits, the cases were consolidated last year in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
On Tuesday, the Justice Department sent a statement of interest arguing the Times' position is "inconsistent with basic copyright law principles" and could "severely hamper 'the Progress of Science and useful Arts.'" Training AI models on copyrighted material "in and of itself," the administration says, is not a violation of copyright laws.
Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976 outlines the conditions of "fair use," which allows anyone to use unlicensed copyright-protected works for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
The Justice Department contends that any use by the AI companies should be considered fair use for a transformative purpose. The Times has rejected this argument, declaring there is nothing transformative about using its content "without payment to create products that substitute for The Times and steal audiences away from it." The outlet claims that OpenAI's generative AI models "compete with and closely mimic the inputs used to train them," nullifying the fair use exemption for its copyrighted works.
Tori Noble, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, disagrees. She says training AI models on copyrighted works is "squarely what transformative use is." These are "general purpose tools" and "exactly the kind of creation that copyright is designed to foster," Noble adds."
-
Copyright has limitations and it's about time these limitations are respected. This is the wrong fight to start with AI companies. Copyright is just another form of rent extraction.
"In 2023, The New York Times sued OpenAI—and its largest investor, Microsoft—for "systematic and competitive infringement," accusing the companies of illegally using copyrighted material to develop their AI models. After other publishers filed their own lawsuits, the cases were consolidated last year in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
On Tuesday, the Justice Department sent a statement of interest arguing the Times' position is "inconsistent with basic copyright law principles" and could "severely hamper 'the Progress of Science and useful Arts.'" Training AI models on copyrighted material "in and of itself," the administration says, is not a violation of copyright laws.
Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976 outlines the conditions of "fair use," which allows anyone to use unlicensed copyright-protected works for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
The Justice Department contends that any use by the AI companies should be considered fair use for a transformative purpose. The Times has rejected this argument, declaring there is nothing transformative about using its content "without payment to create products that substitute for The Times and steal audiences away from it." The outlet claims that OpenAI's generative AI models "compete with and closely mimic the inputs used to train them," nullifying the fair use exemption for its copyrighted works.
Tori Noble, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, disagrees. She says training AI models on copyrighted works is "squarely what transformative use is." These are "general purpose tools" and "exactly the kind of creation that copyright is designed to foster," Noble adds."
-
Copyright has limitations and it's about time these limitations are respected. This is the wrong fight to start with AI companies. Copyright is just another form of rent extraction.
"In 2023, The New York Times sued OpenAI—and its largest investor, Microsoft—for "systematic and competitive infringement," accusing the companies of illegally using copyrighted material to develop their AI models. After other publishers filed their own lawsuits, the cases were consolidated last year in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
On Tuesday, the Justice Department sent a statement of interest arguing the Times' position is "inconsistent with basic copyright law principles" and could "severely hamper 'the Progress of Science and useful Arts.'" Training AI models on copyrighted material "in and of itself," the administration says, is not a violation of copyright laws.
Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976 outlines the conditions of "fair use," which allows anyone to use unlicensed copyright-protected works for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
The Justice Department contends that any use by the AI companies should be considered fair use for a transformative purpose. The Times has rejected this argument, declaring there is nothing transformative about using its content "without payment to create products that substitute for The Times and steal audiences away from it." The outlet claims that OpenAI's generative AI models "compete with and closely mimic the inputs used to train them," nullifying the fair use exemption for its copyrighted works.
Tori Noble, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, disagrees. She says training AI models on copyrighted works is "squarely what transformative use is." These are "general purpose tools" and "exactly the kind of creation that copyright is designed to foster," Noble adds."
-
Copyright has limitations and it's about time these limitations are respected. This is the wrong fight to start with AI companies. Copyright is just another form of rent extraction.
"In 2023, The New York Times sued OpenAI—and its largest investor, Microsoft—for "systematic and competitive infringement," accusing the companies of illegally using copyrighted material to develop their AI models. After other publishers filed their own lawsuits, the cases were consolidated last year in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
On Tuesday, the Justice Department sent a statement of interest arguing the Times' position is "inconsistent with basic copyright law principles" and could "severely hamper 'the Progress of Science and useful Arts.'" Training AI models on copyrighted material "in and of itself," the administration says, is not a violation of copyright laws.
Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976 outlines the conditions of "fair use," which allows anyone to use unlicensed copyright-protected works for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
The Justice Department contends that any use by the AI companies should be considered fair use for a transformative purpose. The Times has rejected this argument, declaring there is nothing transformative about using its content "without payment to create products that substitute for The Times and steal audiences away from it." The outlet claims that OpenAI's generative AI models "compete with and closely mimic the inputs used to train them," nullifying the fair use exemption for its copyrighted works.
Tori Noble, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, disagrees. She says training AI models on copyrighted works is "squarely what transformative use is." These are "general purpose tools" and "exactly the kind of creation that copyright is designed to foster," Noble adds."