← Back to context

Comment by _trampeltier

7 hours ago

It is very different. It is YOUR 3d printer, no one else is involved. You might print a knife and kill somebody with it, you go to jail, not third party involved.

If you use a service like Grok, then you use somebody elses computer / things. X is the owner from computer that produced CP. So of course X is at least also a bit liable for producing CP.

23 comments

_trampeltier

Reply
pdpi  7 hours ago

How does that mesh with all the safe harbour provisions we've depended on to make the modern internet, though?

  • mikeyouse  5 hours ago

    The safe harbor provisions largely protect X from the content that the users post (within reason). Suddenly Grok/X were actually producing the objectionable content. Users were making gross requests and then an LLM owned by X, using X servers and X code would generate the illegal material and then post it to the website. The entity responsible is no longer done user but instead the company itself.

    • Altern4tiveAcc  31 minutes ago

      So, if someone hosts an image editor as web app, are they liable if someone uses that editor to create CP?

      I honestly don't follow it. People creating nudes of others and using the Internet to distribute it can be sued for defamation, sure. I don't think the people hosting the service should be liable themselves, just like people hosting Tor nodes shouldn't be liable by what users of the Tor Network do.

    • luke5441  4 hours ago

      Yes, and that was a very stupid product decision. They could have put the image generation into the post editor, shifting responsibility to the users.

      I'd guess Elon is responsible for that product decision.

  • pjc50  2 hours ago

    Note that is a US law, not a French one.

    Also, safe harbor doesn't apply because this is published under the @grok handle! It's being published by X under one of their brand names, it's absurd to argue that they're unaware or not consenting to its publication.

  • numpad0  3 hours ago

    It's not like the world benefited from safe harbor laws that much. Why don't just amend them so that algorithms that run on server side and platforms that recommend things are not eligible.

  • _trampeltier  5 hours ago

    Before a USER did create content. So the user was / is liable. Now a LLM owned by a company does create content. So the company is liable.

    • hbs18  4 hours ago

      I'm not trying to make excuses for Grok, but how exactly isn't the user creating the content? Grok doesn't have create images on its own volition, the user is still required to give it some input, therefore "creating" the content.

      3 replies →

  • jazzyjackson  5 hours ago

    This might be an unpopular opinion but I always thought we might be better off without Web 2.0 where site owners aren’t held responsible for user content

    If you’re hosting content, why shouldn’t you be responsible, because your business model is impossible if you’re held to account for what’s happening on your premises?

    Without safe harbor, people might have to jump through the hoops of buying their own domain name, and hosting content themselves, would that be so bad?