← Back to context

Comment by baq

3 hours ago

Their idea is being able to get answers to questions which were difficult to answer before[0]. Of course they want to get paid for it. The information wasn’t available easily and not always[1] freely.

[0] among other things…

[1] more like ‘often not at all’

> Of course they want to get paid for it.

So should the original authors, no? That is, getting a share of that payment.

Something akin to the German GEMA could work, an entity that levies a usage fee on behalf of all copyright holders and re-distributes to its members, but on a global scale.

  • > So should the original authors, no? That is, getting a share of that payment.

    Should they? Yes. Will they?

    Well, do LLM model builders pay for any copyrighted work so far?

    • Well, not yet. It's a matter of organization, regulation and litigation.

      I was thinking along the lines of concepts that already exist, such as the private copying levy [0]. It basically forces a blanket tax on a certain class of products, which then gets redistributed to members of a collecting society such as GEMA [1].

      This way, you would force LLM model builders to effectively pay a tax by law. Since these models do not work at all without underlying content, make it proportionate. Let's say 50-70% to make it fair.

      [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy

      [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEMA_(German_organization)