OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us

[omega_jimes@lemmy.ca]

I mean, sure, but the issue is that the rules aren't being applied on the same level. The data in question isn't free for you, it's not free for me, but it's free for OpenAI. They don't face any legal consequences, whereas humans in the USA are prosecuted including an average fine per human of $266,000 and an average prison sentence of 25 months.

OpenAI has pirated, violated copyright, and distributed more copyright than an i divided human is reasonably capable of, and faces no consequences.

https://www.splaw.us/blog/2021/02/looking-into-statistics-on-copyright-violations/

https://www.patronus.ai/blog/introducing-copyright-catcher

My use of the term "human" is awkward, but US law considers corporations people, so i tried to differentiate.

I'm in favour of free and open data, but I'm also of the opinion that the rules should apply to everyone.

[critical_thinker@lemm.ee]

It's a shame that you can't copyright the output of AI, isn't it?

[ziltoid1991@lemmy.world]

Intellectual property theft for me but not for thee!

[ziltoid1991@lemmy.world]

Trump executive order on the copyrightability of AI output in 3...

[whostosay@lemmy.world]

It just gets better and better y'all.

https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/30/deepseek_database_left_open/

[vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de]

so? it won't have any effect on china, because last i checked, us laws apply only in the us

[citizenkong@lemmy.world]

Tale as old as capitalism.

[riot@slrpnk.net]

Security? We don’t need no security!

[whostosay@lemmy.world]

You get a free database, and you get free database, and you get a free database! EVERYBODY GETS A FREE DATABASE

Oprahbees.gif

[lifter@discuss.tchncs.de]

Many licences have different rules for redistribution, which I think is fair. The site is free to use but it's not fair to copy all the data and make a competitive site.

Of course wikipedia could make such a license. I don't think they have though.

How is the lack of infrastructure an argument for allowing something morally incorrect? We can take that argument to absurdum by saying there are more people with guns than there are cops - therefore killing must be morally correct.

[privacydingus@lemmy.world]

[mechoman444@lemmy.world]

The core infrastructure issue is distinguishing between queries made by individuals and those made by programs scraping the internet for AI training data. The answer is that you can't. The way data is presented online makes such differentiation impossible.

Either all data must be placed behind a paywall, or none of it should be. Selective restriction is impractical. Copyright is not the central issue, as AI models do not claim ownership of the data they train on.

If information is freely accessible to everyone, then by definition, it is free to be viewed, queried, and utilized by any application. The copyrighted material used in AI training is not being stored verbatim—it is being learned.

In the same way, an artist drawing inspiration from Michelangelo or Raphael does not need to compensate their estates. They are not copying the work but rather learning from it and creating something new.

[doomsider@lemmy.world]

The new innovate and the old litigate.