Hacker News Reader

Comment by shkkmo | Hacker News Reader

You keep conflating different things.

> We have evidence of LLMs reproducing code from github that was never ever released with a license that would permit their use. We know this is illegal.

What is illegal about it? You are allowed to read and learn from publicly available unlicensed code. If you use that learning to produce a copy of those works, that is enfringement.

Meta clearly enganged in copyright enfringement when they torrented books that they hadn't purchased. That is enfringement already before they started training on the data. That doesn't make the training itself enfringement though.

View on HN

> Meta clearly enganged in copyright enfringement when they torrented books that they hadn't purchased. That is enfringement already before they started training on the data. That doesn't make the training itself enfringement though.

What kind of bullshit argument is this? Really? Works created using illegally obtained copyrighted material are themselves considered to be infringing as well. It's called derivative infringment. This is both common sense and law. Even if not, you agree that they infringed on copyright of something close to all copyrighted works on the internet and this sounds fine to you? The consequences and fines from that would kill any company if they actually had to face them.

> What kind of bullshit argument is this? Really? Works created using illegally obtained copyrighted material are themselves considered to be infringing as well.

That isn't true.

The copyright to derivative works is owned by the copyright holder of the original work. However using illegaly obtained copies to create a fair use transformative work does not taint your copyright of that work.

> Even if not, you agree that they infringed on copyright of something close to all copyrighted works on the internet and this sounds fine to you?

I agree that they violated copyright when they torrented books and scholarly arguments. I don't think that counts at "close to all copyrighted works on the Internet".

> The consequences and fines from that would kill any company if they actually had to face them.

I don't actually agree that copyright that causes no harm should be met with such steep penalties. I didn't agree when it was being done by the RIAA and even though I don't like facebook, I don't like it here either.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com