Re:OpenAI's justification for why training data is fair use,...
by ang_cire on Thursday October 05, 2023 @02:39PM
(#37782344)
The big difference is that Google legally obtained the copies of the books they scanned. OpenAI did not. Publicly-accessible != legal to download/ copy.
The copyright infringement in Google's case was not illegally obtaining the original work, it was about the snippets they provided.
In OpenAI's case, it is also about the illegal obtainment (downloading) of the original work, which they admit to in their brief, but argue shouldn't be illegal if they intend only to transform it. That element was not present in AGI v Google.
The copyright infringement in Google's case was not illegally obtaining the original work, it was about the snippets they provided.
In OpenAI's case, it is also about the illegal obtainment (downloading) of the original work, which they admit to in their brief, but argue shouldn't be illegal if they intend only to transform it. That element was not present in AGI v Google.