Did Google ever agree to these terms of service? Why should they care?
From a legal point of view this doesn't matter and from a moral point of view it's hilarious.
From a legal point of view this doesn't matter and from a moral point of view it's hilarious.
From OpenAI's terms:
(c) Restrictions. You may not (i) use the Services in a way that infringes, misappropriates or violates any person’s rights; (ii) reverse assemble, reverse compile, decompile, translate or otherwise attempt to discover the source code or underlying components of models, algorithms, and systems of the Services (except to the extent such restrictions are contrary to applicable law); (iii) use output from the Services to develop models that compete with OpenAI;
(j) Equitable Remedies. You acknowledge that if you violate or breach these Terms, it may cause irreparable harm to OpenAI and its affiliates, and OpenAI shall have the right to seek injunctive relief against you in addition to any other legal remedies.
Those two very clearly establish that if you use the output of their service to develop your own models, then you are in breach of the terms and they can seek injunctive relief against you (stop you from working until the case is resolved).
…
Somehow, I don’t think they’ll care.
Otherwise, it will be considered public information, at which point it is free to be scraped by anyone (see the precedent set by the LinkedIn/hiQ case).
I was pointed at a link explaining the case here on HN, after trying to make a similar point, but cannot find the link currently
edit, not the one I was pointed at, but similar
https://www.fbm.com/publications/what-recent-rulings-in-hiq-...
From your link:
>These rulings suggest that courts are much more comfortable restricting scraping activity where the parties have agreed by contract (whether directly or through agents) not to scrape. But courts remain wary of applying the CFAA and the potential criminal consequences it carries to scraping. The apparent exception is when a company engages in a pattern of intentionally creating fake accounts to collect logged-in data.
Otherwise it would create an interesting dynamic that startups where no-one has created an OpenAI account would have a massive advantage, since they can freely scrape ShareGPT data and train on it while larger companies have enough employees that someone must have signed every TOS.