Legal News

433 readers

8 users here now

International and local legal news.

Basic rules

1. English only

Title and associated content has to be in English.

2. Sensitive topics need NSFW flag

Some cases involve sensitive topics. Use common sense and if you think that the content might trigger someone, post it under NSFW flag.

3. Instance rules apply

All lemmy.zip instance rules listed in the sidebar will be enforced.

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @[email protected].

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

167

Judge on Meta’s AI training: “I just don’t understand how that can be fair use” (arstechnica.com)

submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

Looks like he's focusing mostly on the financial impact to the folks who's work gets used as training data

The judge repeatedly appeared to be sympathetic to authors, suggesting that Meta's AI training may be a "highly unusual case" where even though "the copying is for a highly transformative purpose, the copying has the high likelihood of leading to the flooding of the markets for the copyrighted works."

And when Shanmugam argued that copyright law doesn't shield authors from "protection from competition in the marketplace of ideas," Chhabria resisted the framing that authors weren’t potentially being robbed, Reuters reported.

"But if I'm going to steal things from the marketplace of ideas in order to develop my own ideas, that's copyright infringement, right?" Chhabria responded.

Wired noted that he asked Meta's lawyers, "What about the next Taylor Swift?" If AI made it easy to knock off a young singer's sound, how could she ever compete if AI produced "a billion pop songs" in her style?