OpenAI has publicly responded to a copyright lawsuit by The New York Times, calling the case “without merit” and saying it still hoped for a partnership with the media outlet.

In a blog post, OpenAI said the Times “is not telling the full story.” It took particular issue with claims that its ChatGPT AI tool reproduced Times stories verbatim, arguing that the Times had manipulated prompts to include regurgitated excerpts of articles. “Even when using such prompts, our models don’t typically behave the way The New York Times insinuates, which suggests they either instructed the model to regurgitate or cherry-picked their examples from many attempts,” OpenAI said.

OpenAI claims it’s attempted to reduce regurgitation from its large language models and that the Times refused to share examples of this reproduction before filing the lawsuit. It said the verbatim examples “appear to be from year-old articles that have proliferated on multiple third-party websites.” The company did admit that it took down a ChatGPT feature, called Browse, that unintentionally reproduced content.

  • 000@fuck.markets
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    There hasn’t been a court ruling in the US that makes training a model on copyrighted data any sort of violation. Regurgitating exact content is a clear copyright violation, but simply using the original content/media in a model has not been ruled a breach of copyright (yet).

    • SheeEttin@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      True. I fully expect that the court will rule against OpenAI here, because it very obviously does not meet any fair use exemption.

      • 520@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        For that to work, NYT has to prove OpenAI is copying their words verbatim, not just their style.

        If the AI isn’t outputting a string of words that can be found on an NYT article, they don’t stand a chance

      • kromem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Tell me you haven’t actually read legal opinions on the subject without telling me…

        • SheeEttin@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’m not aware of any federal case law on copyright and AI. Happy to read some if you have a suggestion.