Re:On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train...
by croes on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @01:25PM
(#39016698)
I doubt it's still fair use if you become one of most valuable companies, hence the word "fair" in fair use.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train...
by andybak on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @01:32PM
(#39016817)
It's a specific legal term - so the everyday meaning of the words isn't relevant as far as I understand it.
Re:On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train...
by croes on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @01:52PM
(#39017169)
There is a reason why the word was chosen, in essence, it is about the meaning of the word
Re:On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train...
by yreg on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @02:32PM
(#39017868)
The value of a company has nothing to do with whether copyright applies.
Re:On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train...
by croes on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @04:10PM
(#39019187)
Unless the value of the company is based on one product with alleged copyright infringement.
OpenAI has one asset: GPT.
>Commercial use does not automatically make the use copyright infringement, but it is an important deciding factor.
https://saltiellawgroup.com/2021/10/%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8Bcan-yo...
Re:On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train...
by yreg on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @06:10PM
(#39020503)
That says nothing about the value of the company.
If it's an infringement when OpenAI does it, it would be an infringement when a company with 1/1000th the value did it.
Re:On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train...
by tsimionescu on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @01:33PM
(#39016829)
The fair in fair use has nothing to do with the size of a company. If Disney produces a satire of Penny Arcade, that's still fair use of Penny Arcade's IP.