> A ruling in favor of copyright would force OpenAI to shut down - but given their impressive demo of the tech
Who cares? If they want data, they can pay for it.
Who cares? If they want data, they can pay for it.
The issue here really lies in "yeah so how actually DOES this make a difference" legally speaking. It just seems unfair that I'm not allowed to copypaste a text verbatim or upload a movie to youtube that I don't own the copyright for, yet OpenAI can happily commercialize on content that has been sorted and rated for quality by someone else.
The question is "are they allowed to do this under the umbrella of current copyright legislation?" and the answer has far reaching implications.
That is what is being proposed, ban AI from being allowed to 'read' the content.
The real argument is how does a human brain aggregate knowledge and then profit from it, and is it really that different from an AI model aggregating knowledge.
They both read in data, perform calculations on the data, and spit out something.
It seems you are assuming that humans contains some metaphysical 'essence' like a soul that is doing the thinking?
Please connect the dots here.