← Back to context

Comment by tristanj

20 hours ago

That is incorrect. Anthropic paid $1.5 billion in compensation to copyright holders for use of their content in training data. OpenAI pays hundreds of millions per year across 150+ licensing deals for access to copyrighted data. Meta and Alphabet have similar arrangements.

Under the settlement, Anthropic was forced to delete the pirated data they were training on.

Chinese labs can still train on pirated data. I doubt the Chinese models operate under similar licensing agreements.

Anthropic paid $1.5 billion in compensation to copyright holders for use of their content in training data.

The payment was for illegally downloading copyrighted material, not training. Training was explicitly ruled to be fair use.

  • Partially correct. The court explicitly ruled that training on pirated data, which is what Anthropic was doing, is not considered fair use.

    Training on legally acquired / licensed data is potentially fair use.

they didn't pay yet, because court challenged settlement as inadequate.

> I doubt the Chinese models operate under similar licensing agreements.

US corps likely pay licenses when afraid to be sued, or have troubles getting that data, otherwise they just take data, which was demonstrated many times. The same apply to Chinese corps, alibaba totally can be sued in US.

  • China is infamous for weakly enforcing copyright law. Even when it is completely obvious that Chinese labs are training models on pirated data, US copyright holders face a virtually impossible task of proving it in court. Those lawsuits won't go anywhere.

They settled with a subset of copyright holders. Guarantee they violated lots of others' rights in the process

They only paid when they got caught. And not to everyone.

  • But they still paid. I don't see any Chinese labs paying billion dollar infringement settlements.

    Chinese labs can freely train on pirated material, which is a structural advantage.

That's like saying someone is a big proponent of community law and order, and they donated $1000 to the county sheriff when actually they got caught drunk speeding in a school zone.

  • A false equivalence. A more correct example is: Anthropic was speeding, got caught by the county sheriff, and paid the fine. Anthropic stopped speeding.

    Meanwhile, Chinese labs are speeding in a different county. Everyone knows they are speeding, yet the sheriff won't pull them over, so they just keep doing it.

    This lax enforcement gives Chinese labs a structural advantage over American ones.

    • > Anthropic stopped speeding.

      Do you purport to know for a fact that they're no longer training on the data they'd pirated? Because I highly doubt that.

      1 reply →

Because they got caught

there is much less intellectual property in China so it’s not ‘theft’ (as you can’t put property on information)

After the fact. They did the same thing Youtube, Uber and Airbnb did: Break the law, eventually get caught, cut some deal where they pay a pittance and keep doing the same thing but now with leverage on their side.