Comment on Are there any llms made from 100% public domain / permissively licensed training data?

• CameronDev@programming.dev ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  If that dataset has copyrighted material, nvidia committed a clear copyright violation by publishing it publically. I’m happy to trust that nvidias lawyers have vetted it properly.

  source

  • dhork@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I’m happy to trust that nvidias lawyers have vetted it properly.

    Yes, but while you would vet it by “what complies with laws”, large companies use the “what can we getaway with” metric. And if the only penalty is a fine, they will just consider that cost of doing business, and do it anyway.

    source

    • CameronDev@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      True, but as per the anthropic settlement linked in another comment, the penalties are pretty significant. 1.5B is a pretty reasonable fine against a 59B profit. Copyright still has some pretty significant teeth.

      Its not like its antitrust /j

      source

      • snooggums@piefed.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        . 1.5B is a pretty reasonable fine against a 59B profit.

        How is a single digit percentage of profit a penalty?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • pulsewidth@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    You think the wealthiest business on Earth is afraid of a little thing like copyright law?

    source
  • ell1e@leminal.space ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    oh you sweet summer child…

    twobirds.com/…/landmark-ruling-of-the-munich-regi…

    reuters.com/…/us-judge-approves-anthropics-15-bil…

    (I’m just linking random lawsuits. I’m not a lawyer, this isn’t legal advice.)

    source

    • Grimy@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      oh you sweet summer child

      Image

      source
    • CameronDev@programming.dev ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      There is no need to call me a sweet summer child.

      I’m not terribly swayed by a Munich regional case, especially as its still under appeal.

      The anthropic settlement definitely is a bit more meaningful though, although it does contradict the Munich one:

      We reached this settlement in 2025, after the court’s landmark ruling that training AI on books is fair ​use under copyright law

      The basically settled because they stole the copies of books they used to train on. If they had just paid for a copy of the books they possibly would have been fine.

      source

      • ell1e@leminal.space ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

        My apologies, it was an attempt at humor which I can see backfired terribly. I personally find the regional case is interesting because it shows the possibility of courts seeing this differently, and it’s more than just the ones I quoted.

        I think there might be a possible misunderstanding, sorry about my lack of clarity: I wasn’t trying to prove that this is for sure a copryight infringement, since I’m not a lawyer anyway. But I think it’s pretty obvious NVidia doesn’t care if it turns out to be one.

        source
    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I’m not a lawyer, this isn’t legal advice.

      What an annoying and pointless thing to write several times in a row. One time was more than enough.

      source

      • ell1e@leminal.space ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

        [deleted]

        source

        • -> View More Comments