Ah yes. "Public Domain" == "Theft"

I propose that anyone defending themselves in court over AI stealing data must be represented exclusively by AI.

Not everything is public domain, thief scum.

What you see as "spot the error" type training, another person sees as absolute fact that they internalize and use to make decisions that impact the world. The internet gave rise to the golden age of conspiracy theories, which is having a major impact on the worsening political climate, and it's because the average user isn't able to differentiate information from disinformation. AI chatbots giving people the answer they're looking for rather than the truth is only going to compound the issue.

Fucking good!! Let the AI industry BURN!

Do they even teach the constitution anymore?

An important note here, the judge has already ruled in this case that "using Plaintiffs' works "to train specific LLMs [was] justified as a fair use" because "[t]he technology at issue was among the most transformative many of us will see in our lifetimes." during the summary judgement order.

The plaintiffs are not suing Anthropic for infringing on their copyright, the court has already ruled that it was so obvious that they could not succeed with that argument that it could be dismissed. Their only remaining claim is that Anthropic downloaded the books from piracy sites using bittorrent

This isn't about LLMs anymore, it's a standard "You downloaded something on Bittorrent and made a company mad"-type case that has been going on since Napster.

Also, the headline is incredibly misleading. It's ascribing feelings to an entire industry based on a common legal filing that is not by itself noteworthy. Unless you really care about legal technicalities, you can stop here.

The actual news, the new factual thing that happened, is that the Consumer Technology Association and the Computer and Communications Industry Association filed an Amicus Brief, in an appeal of an issue that Anthropic the court ruled against.

This is pretty normal legal filing about legal technicalities. This isn't really newsworthy outside of, maybe, some people in the legal profession who are bored.

The issue was class certification.

Three people sued Anthropic. Instead of just suing Anthropic on behalf of themselves, they moved to be certified as class. That is to say that they wanted to sue on behalf of a larger group of people, in this case a "Pirated Books Class" of authors whose books Anthropic downloaded from the book piracy websites.

The judge ruled they can represent the class, Anthropic appealed the ruling. During this appeal an industry group filed an Amicus brief with arguments supporting Anthropic's argument. This is not uncommon, The Onion famously filed an Amicus brief with the Supreme Court when they were about to rule on issues of parody. Like everything The Onion writes, it's a good piece of satire: link

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-293/242292/20221003125252896_35295545_1-22.10.03%2520-%2520Novak-Parma%2520-%2520Onion%2520Amicus%2520Brief.pdf

ERROR: File or directory not found.

The site formatting broke it. Maybe it'll work as a link

Yup, seems to work

Not every country lives under the Divided States constitution you entitled twat. Other countries are actually free living with actual rights.

Not that having a constitution ever meant anything to you idiots as you just sit there watching taco tits wipe his asshole with it.

Yeah, so, this lawsuit is under US jurisdiction. Your entire comment is entirely irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

We just need to show that ChatGPT and alike can generate Nintendo based content and let it fight out between them

What um, what court system do you think is going to make that happen? Cause the current one is owned by an extremely pro-AI administration. If anything gets appealed to SCOTUS they will rule for AI.