logoalt Hacker News

ninjahawk1today at 3:42 PM14 repliesview on HN

The U.S. does NOT have copyright protections on the data that AI models were and are trained on, it was mass theft. Now all of a sudden, the Chinese are stealing from the thieves and we’re supposed to care?

No one cares, we just want cheaper AI models that are equally as powerful. They’re all thieves regardless.


Replies

dangtoday at 5:20 PM

Ok, but can you please follow the HN guidelines and focus on specific, thoughtful discussion, not generic/indignant tangents? The first is what we're trying for, and the second basically destroys it.

"Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Ultimately this is more a problem with the upvoting system than the comments themselves, since generic/indignant comments routinely attract lots of upvotes, and then sit on top of the thread, smothering more interesting discussion. But in terms of moderation we can only reply to commenters.

jchwtoday at 3:55 PM

Its even dumber when you consider AI model output was not considered copyrighted or eligible for copyright to begin with, as far as I know. How exactly would this even be "theft"?

show 1 reply
WarmWashtoday at 4:03 PM

Training on copyright was ruled to be transformative.

Anthropic was just fined for not paying for the pirated books they copied into a training database. Same as anyone else who copied pirated IP onto their hard drive.

However, training an AI on copyright has been ruled to be sufficiently transformative and not a violation of IP laws. The same way you can make a gameplay clone of Call of Duty without any issue.

show 1 reply
petilontoday at 4:54 PM

> The U.S. does NOT have copyright protections on the data that AI models were and are trained on, it was mass theft.

Absolutely false. Courts have decided that it is fair use [1]. That makes sense. It should not be used to justify Chinese theft.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us-judge-approves-anthropics-1...

show 2 replies
__MatrixMan__today at 5:14 PM

Copyright infringement, maybe. Theft? No. When something is stolen from you, you don't have that thing anymore.

JumpCrisscrosstoday at 3:50 PM

This is a silly argument. Like yes, obviously it’s of less U.S. concern if one American is robbing another versus a foreign interest. We can deal with one whenever while the other creates constraints.

The better arguments are the ones made in the article. Open weights increase competition and thus AI availability in the U.S. economy.

show 5 replies
paulddrapertoday at 4:54 PM

You're trying to kidnap what I've rightfully stolen!

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4cxcsa

nekusartoday at 4:06 PM

Are public libraries thieves?

Is Anna's Library thieves?

Is Library Genesis thieves?

Is Archive.org thieves?

Is PirateBay thieves?

They all look like public libraries to me. And better access to had man knowledge is a net positive for everyone.

show 2 replies
lenerdenatortoday at 4:17 PM

The answer to widespread theft is not to simply allow the guy who did the theft to get away with it because his implementation was cheaper.

It's to punish theft.

jMylestoday at 4:16 PM

The era of so-called "intellectual property" is over.

You can accept it or not. But it's going to be a lot easier if you do.

ai_fry_ur_braintoday at 5:01 PM

[dead]

1234letshaveatwtoday at 4:18 PM

I only upvote when the EU enacts protectionist policies! Not the USA!

mc32today at 3:55 PM

One’s like taking something from your brother or sister and the other is like taking from your neighbor with whom you have a bad history…

GlickWicktoday at 3:47 PM

I do care.

It's an unfortunate truth that we're exiting a global peace era and entering one of (hopefully just...) implied conflict. Our biggest geopolitical rival that's been threatening a hot war also distilling the things we build is not a good thing.

Trump is a huge self-own by our electorate sadly, but being concerned about a conflict between China and the US is a very bi-partisan concern for good reason.

show 10 replies