logoalt Hacker News

JimDabell • today at 11:03 AM • 5 replies • view on HN

> how can you argue about about IP and copyright if the breakthrough of LLMs is potentially based on circumventing or breaking IP and copyright in the first place?

Easy answer: it’s not. Learning isn’t copyright infringement. Never has been and hopefully never will be.


Replies

dimbletimbers • today at 11:31 AM

This is another case of anthropomorphic language for AI failing us. Who could be opposed to “learning?”

If I learn from a textbook I stole, some people maybe be thrilled I learned something, but stealing is still a crime and hopefully always will be.

prathje • today at 11:29 AM

Well, of course learning isn't the problem and shouldn't be. But what about reselling/commercialising that knowledge? That is the big (commercial) opportunity. But if AI models learn by fitting their parameters to the given data, then overfitting on said data could result in the IP or copyrighted being "slopped" out verbatim?

➕ show 1 reply
LunaSea • today at 11:25 AM

Learning isn't but using that knowledge is.

bluefirebrand • today at 11:56 AM

> Learning isn’t copyright infringement. Never has been and hopefully never will be.

For humans.

Why should computer systems owned by corporations have anything remotely similar to the same freedoms as humans?

ragall • today at 1:41 PM

> Learning isn’t copyright infringement.

Of course, but only humans are able to learn. Clanker enhancement is stealing.