Hacker News Reader

Comment by pier25 | Hacker News Reader

Are we talking about the same company that needs data desperately and has used copyrighted material illegally without permission?

View on HN

When did they use copyrighted material illegally?

I didn't think any of the ongoing "fair use" lawsuits had reached a conclusion on that.

The Thomson Reuters case [1] is the most relevant in the court's finding that the copying of copyrighted material from Westlaw by Ross Intelligence was direct copyright infringement and was not fair use.

The purpose of training in many of the AI Labs being sued mostly matches the conditions that Ross Intelligence was found to have violated, and the question of copying is almost guaranteed if they trained on it.

[1] Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH et al v. ROSS Intelligence Inc. https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/opinions/20-613...

Thanks, I hadn't seen that one.

ok then let's say they used the copyrighted material without permission

Sorry, I meant to write "monetized copyrighted material without permission".

We'll see if the courts deem it legal but it's, without a doubt, unehtical.

Eh, I have the opposite view but then again I'm a copyright minimalist.

So you think artists do not need to be able to make a living?

I think everyone has a right to live, but we don't have to break human culture with commercialization to achieve that.

That's true, they did.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com