How copyright lawsuits could kill OpenAI
www.vox.com
The New York Times v. OpenAI, explained.

A New York Times copyright lawsuit could kill OpenAI::A list of authors and entertainers are also suing the tech company for damages that could total in the billions.

  • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    This is the wrong way around. The NYT wants money for the use of its “intellectual property”. This is about money for property owners. When building rents go up, you wouldn’t expect construction workers to benefit, right?

    I do not find that to be an apt analogy. This is more like someone setting up shop in the NYT’s lobby, stealing issues, and cutting them up to make their own newspaper that they sell from said lobby, without permission or compensation. OpenAI just refined a technology to parasitize off of others’ labor and is using it to seev rent over intellectual property that they don’t own or have rights to use.

    So, the subscription fees represent a part of the gains to society. If a part of these subscription fees is paid to property owners, who did not contribute anything, then that means that this part of the social gains is funneled to property owners, IE mainly the ultra-rich, simply for being owners/ultra-rich.

    I’m going to have to strongly disagree with here. The subscription fees are only going to the ultra-wealthy who are using LLMs to parasitize off of labor. The NYT is not who I’m worried about having their livelihoods destroyed, it’s the individual artists, actors, and creatives, as well as those whose jobs are being replaced with terrible chatbots that cannot actually do the work but are implemented anyway to drive lay-offs and boost stock prices. The NYT and other suits are merely a proxy due to the wealth gap leading to it being nearly impossible for those most impacted to successfully utilize the courts to remedy their situation.

    • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      I do not find that to be an apt analogy.

      The point is that the people who create some property don’t get a cut when the property rises in value. You keep calling the intellectual property of the NYT labor. I think there’s something there you seriously misunderstand.

      This is more like someone setting up shop in the NYT’s lobby, stealing issues, and cutting them up to make their own newspaper that they sell from said lobby, without permission or compensation.

      That’s an analogy for a normal practice in journalism. Like when other news media (other websites, TV, radio, …) reports that on what the NYT reports. I’m sure you have seen articles where it said something like “The NYT reported that…”.

      That’s not what the case is mainly about. I’m not sure if anything like that is even mentioned.

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        I think that you are overlooking the part about aggressively competing against the original creation with something that is impossible without the existence of the initial creation. Also the part where the NYT isn’t really the ones most impacted by the current pushes for adoption of LLMs and similar tech. It’s not a case of punchcard computer operators becoming obsolete. It’s a case of using technology to deny those involved in creating and evolving culture along with those in the few remaining jobs that allow one to get by the ability to make a living.

        Humanity as a whole isn’t benefiting, only the ultra-wealthy who are using and refining these tools for no other purbose but to further bludgeon and dehumanize workers, grow the number on the precipice of total ruin, and increase the wealth gap further. So, the NYT merely is playing the role of “the enemy of my enemy”.

        If the tools WEREN’T being used primarily to skim even more wealth and push more into poverty, there would be no problems (especially if the result were reform of the currently awful IP laws). But, we currently live in a world where billionaires are writing to profitable tech companies demanding mass lay-offs and deep salary cuts to increase stock prices, voice actors are thrown under the bus by their own union, and eating disorder helpline workers are fired en masse for unionizing to to be replaced with chatbots that cause measurable harm to vulnerable people. OpenAI deserves to be shutdown for the harm that they are enabling and profiting from.

        • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          10 months ago

          At first, I laid out how a win for NYT will benefit mainly the wealthy. It will increase the wealth gap. Clearly you don’t agree.

          Could you please explain where you see an error in my reasoning/where it was not clear enough?