Hacker News Reader

Comment by blackeyeblitzar | Hacker News Reader

I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “the button”. If you’re comparing this to DeepSeek’s copying, it’s not really the same thing right? DeepSeek essentially stole intellectual property by violating OpenAI’s terms of service. As I understand it, this is a copy of Google’s Deep Research

View on HN

I chuckle every time I see this. Poor OpenAI.

Meanwhile, their entire training corpus was the result of scraping the intellectual property and copyrighted materials of THE ENTIRE PUBLIC INTERNET.

Woe is them to be sure.

OpenAI’s scraping will likely be ruled as fair use.

Deepseek proved that there is no moat. Thus no path to profitability for openai, anthropic & co.

Stealing from thieves is fine by me. Sama was the one claiming that all information could be used to train LLMs, without permisdion of the copyright holders.

Now the same is being done to openai. Well, too bad.

> Stealing from thieves is fine by me. Sama was the one claiming that all information could be used to train LLMs, without permisdion of the copyright holders.

OpenAI and other LLMs scraping the internet is probably covered under fair use. DeepSeek’s violation of OpenAI’s terms is pretty clearly a violation of their terms and not legal.

>DeepSeek’s violation of OpenAI’s terms is pretty clearly a violation of their terms and not legal.

Here is a new thing you learn today, ToS are not laws, you can ignore any ToS and at worst the company might close your account.

Care to explain how something that cannot be copyrighted and was not generated by a human is “intellectual property“? Or are you just parroting a narrative?

Trade secrets are protected by the law. It doesn’t require copyright.

Explain the trade secrets contained in non-copyrightable AI outputs and the reasonable efforts OpenAI takes to keep its AI output “secret”. Or are you confused about what a “trade secret” actually is?

Didn't OpenAI steal everyone's data they could consume from the internet? Actively being sued by the NY Times and others for this...

Yes those cases will be interesting. By default a lot of copyrighted content may be legal to use for training (in the US but also many other places) under what’s called fair use. The cases you’re referring to will likely reinforce this, but it isn’t known yet. Note that it’s not just OpenAI on that side of the argument but also other (non tech) organizations that believe protecting fair use here is current law and essential.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com