Noerknhar@feddit.org to Fuck AI@lemmy.world · 3 days agoAnthropic can legally train AI on books without authors permission, judge rulescybernews.comexternal-linkmessage-square38fedilinkarrow-up1175arrow-down14file-textcross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1171arrow-down1external-linkAnthropic can legally train AI on books without authors permission, judge rulescybernews.comNoerknhar@feddit.org to Fuck AI@lemmy.world · 3 days agomessage-square38fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squarejmill@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkarrow-up7·2 days agoIf you made money doing that, it probably would be illegal. You would certainly get sued, in any case.
minus-squareHobbitFoot @thelemmy.clublinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down9·2 days agoPeople make a lot of money summarizing articles behind paywalls and it is generally considered legal as long as it is a summary and not copied text.
minus-squareHobbitFoot @thelemmy.clublinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down5·2 days agoYou don’t have to pay for fair use.
minus-squarenjm1314@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 days agoSo how are they making a lot of money then?
minus-squareHobbitFoot @thelemmy.clublinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down3·2 days agoAdvertisement. You don’t have to pay for original content. You just need to pay someone/thing to summarize it and get clicks for advertisement.
minus-squarenjm1314@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·2 days agoI can’t say I’ve ever seen this in my life. Paid advertisement on summaries of paywalled articles. Not something I’ve come across. Certainly they would be sued if they were found by the companies in question I imagine.
minus-squareHobbitFoot @thelemmy.clublinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down2·2 days agoSure you have. If you ever have read an article that says “As reported in X”, that is a summarization of another journalist’s work.
minus-squarenjm1314@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 days agoWell now I don’t think you understand what a summarization is.
If you made money doing that, it probably would be illegal. You would certainly get sued, in any case.
People make a lot of money summarizing articles behind paywalls and it is generally considered legal as long as it is a summary and not copied text.
Who are you paying for that?
You don’t have to pay for fair use.
So how are they making a lot of money then?
Advertisement. You don’t have to pay for original content. You just need to pay someone/thing to summarize it and get clicks for advertisement.
I can’t say I’ve ever seen this in my life. Paid advertisement on summaries of paywalled articles. Not something I’ve come across. Certainly they would be sued if they were found by the companies in question I imagine.
Sure you have. If you ever have read an article that says “As reported in X”, that is a summarization of another journalist’s work.
Well now I don’t think you understand what a summarization is.