Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. So, OpenAI admits two things in disclosures presented to the court:

So, OpenAI admits two things in disclosures presented to the court:

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
13 Indlæg 7 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

    So, OpenAI admits two things in disclosures presented to the court:

    • That their products are utterly dependent on work ingested without compensation.
    • That their derived product is directly substituting for this work, removing the economic incentive to perform that work in the first place.

    Meanwhile, the EFF filed an amicus brief in the case claiming that this use is exactly what was intended by the ‘To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts’ justification for the existence of copyright in the US Constitution.

    toni@zug.networkT This user is from outside of this forum
    toni@zug.networkT This user is from outside of this forum
    toni@zug.network
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #2

    @david_chisnall Wait, do I understand this right? The EFF supports the AI companies?

    david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • toni@zug.networkT toni@zug.network

      @david_chisnall Wait, do I understand this right? The EFF supports the AI companies?

      david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
      david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
      david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #3

      @toni Yup. I posted a couple of days ago about the two things I hate most in their filing.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • yora@mastodon.gamedev.placeY This user is from outside of this forum
        yora@mastodon.gamedev.placeY This user is from outside of this forum
        yora@mastodon.gamedev.place
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #4

        @toni @david_chisnall Yes. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is a tech billionaire lobby group.

        #EFF #AI #techbros #enshittification

        toni@zug.networkT 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

          So, OpenAI admits two things in disclosures presented to the court:

          • That their products are utterly dependent on work ingested without compensation.
          • That their derived product is directly substituting for this work, removing the economic incentive to perform that work in the first place.

          Meanwhile, the EFF filed an amicus brief in the case claiming that this use is exactly what was intended by the ‘To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts’ justification for the existence of copyright in the US Constitution.

          malteengeler@legal.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
          malteengeler@legal.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
          malteengeler@legal.social
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #5

          @david_chisnall You are referring to the ones in 2025, yes? https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/12/artificial-intelligence-copyright-and-fight-user-rights-2025-review

          Or did EFF issue newer ones?

          david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • malteengeler@legal.socialM malteengeler@legal.social

            @david_chisnall You are referring to the ones in 2025, yes? https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/12/artificial-intelligence-copyright-and-fight-user-rights-2025-review

            Or did EFF issue newer ones?

            david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
            david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
            david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #6

            @malteengeler

            I’m not sure when they filed it, they boasted about it a week ago.

            malteengeler@legal.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

              So, OpenAI admits two things in disclosures presented to the court:

              • That their products are utterly dependent on work ingested without compensation.
              • That their derived product is directly substituting for this work, removing the economic incentive to perform that work in the first place.

              Meanwhile, the EFF filed an amicus brief in the case claiming that this use is exactly what was intended by the ‘To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts’ justification for the existence of copyright in the US Constitution.

              E This user is from outside of this forum
              E This user is from outside of this forum
              esoteric_programmer@social.stealthy.club
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #7

              @david_chisnall wait what? the EFF sued open AI? I'm completely out of the loop on this one

              david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • E esoteric_programmer@social.stealthy.club

                @david_chisnall wait what? the EFF sued open AI? I'm completely out of the loop on this one

                david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #8

                @esoteric_programmer

                No, New York Times sued OpenAI. EFF filed a motion in support of OpenAI.

                Their mastodon account boasted about this nine days ago.

                E 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                  @esoteric_programmer

                  No, New York Times sued OpenAI. EFF filed a motion in support of OpenAI.

                  Their mastodon account boasted about this nine days ago.

                  E This user is from outside of this forum
                  E This user is from outside of this forum
                  esoteric_programmer@social.stealthy.club
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #9

                  @david_chisnall oof, horrible. Being a copyright maximalist and putting copyright above everything, forgetting how much harm companies have caused in the past by using their legal weight to crush people's artistic expression isn't good, but defending that kind of stuff is gross.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                    @malteengeler

                    I’m not sure when they filed it, they boasted about it a week ago.

                    malteengeler@legal.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                    malteengeler@legal.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                    malteengeler@legal.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #10

                    @david_chisnall Oh yes, indeed. Thanks.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                      So, OpenAI admits two things in disclosures presented to the court:

                      • That their products are utterly dependent on work ingested without compensation.
                      • That their derived product is directly substituting for this work, removing the economic incentive to perform that work in the first place.

                      Meanwhile, the EFF filed an amicus brief in the case claiming that this use is exactly what was intended by the ‘To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts’ justification for the existence of copyright in the US Constitution.

                      dch@bsd.networkD This user is from outside of this forum
                      dch@bsd.networkD This user is from outside of this forum
                      dch@bsd.network
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #11

                      @david_chisnall this is one of those Scooby-Doo WTF moments at the end of the episode.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • yora@mastodon.gamedev.placeY yora@mastodon.gamedev.place

                        @toni @david_chisnall Yes. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is a tech billionaire lobby group.

                        #EFF #AI #techbros #enshittification

                        toni@zug.networkT This user is from outside of this forum
                        toni@zug.networkT This user is from outside of this forum
                        toni@zug.network
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #12

                        @yora @david_chisnall I’m aware of that on a theoretical level, but then I’m still… not surprised, but disappointed every time. Must be that I’m not hearing from them too often.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                          So, OpenAI admits two things in disclosures presented to the court:

                          • That their products are utterly dependent on work ingested without compensation.
                          • That their derived product is directly substituting for this work, removing the economic incentive to perform that work in the first place.

                          Meanwhile, the EFF filed an amicus brief in the case claiming that this use is exactly what was intended by the ‘To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts’ justification for the existence of copyright in the US Constitution.

                          blainehines@infosec.exchangeB This user is from outside of this forum
                          blainehines@infosec.exchangeB This user is from outside of this forum
                          blainehines@infosec.exchange
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #13

                          @david_chisnall Wow a self eating loop..

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • pelle@veganism.socialP pelle@veganism.social shared this topic
                          Svar
                          • Svar som emne
                          Login for at svare
                          • Ældste til nyeste
                          • Nyeste til ældste
                          • Most Votes


                          • Log ind

                          • Login or register to search.
                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Hjem
                          • Seneste
                          • Etiketter
                          • Populære
                          • Verden
                          • Bruger
                          • Grupper