Comment by gruez

16 days ago

>Makes sense to me. AI models are trained on (as large of a subset as possible of) the sum of human knowledge, so their outputs should belong to humanity as a whole.

No it doesn't, because that would mean any sort of secondary source shouldn't be eligible for copyright either, eg. encyclopedias, which are basically rehashing "the sum of human knowledge".

Interesting POV. Remind me - did those encyclopedias pay experts to write their contents, or did they just hoover up every bit of text they could find - regardless of owner - and toss it into a blender?

  • Sure, I'll remind you. The most popular encyclopedia of our time, Wikipedia, doesn't pay most of its contributors (I think they do have some administrative staff or something?). Nor do they pay journalists or authors for the articles and books that they cite.

    • Interesting, interesting. And this wikipedia - it gets its contents by hoovering up the web, then? Or do you maybe want to put on your thinking hat and consider the difference between voluntary contributions and theft?

      7 replies →

  • I don't see how "experts" are relevant under OP's framework unless they're did the primary research themselves. Otherwise they're just regurgitating someone else's research. The "oh there's humans involved so that gets pass" excuse doesn't work either, because humans were also involved in training the AI.

    • Please reread the comment you are replying to. I will wait.

      —-

      Now that you have reread the initial comment, do you think that “experts” was the important part? Or do you think maybe it was the compensation for their work that matters?

      4 replies →

Correct, and if it wasn't already obvious by now I believe that to be an unambiguously good thing.

  • Like, now with the advent of AI, or even before? You might not have much love for encyclopedias, which were mostly replaced by wikipedia, but the "secondary sources don't get copyright protection" would also cover programming books, which roughly speaking are docs rewritten to a cohesive narrative.

    • > Like, now with the advent of AI, or even before?

      My disdain for intellectual property predates the existence of LLMs by at least a decade.