this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
314 points (95.6% liked)

Technology

60336 readers
5016 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

I’m glad someone is sane ITT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uY9z2b85qcE

To be clear, I think it ought to be the case that at least "copyleft" GPL code can't be used to train an LLM without requiring that all output of the LLM become GPL (which, if said GPL training data were mixed with proprietary training data, would likely make the model legally unusable in total). AFAIK it's way too soon for there to be a precedent-setting court ruling about it, though.

In particular...

I thought Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. would serve as the basis there

...I don't see how this has any relevancy at all, since the whole purpose of an LLM is to make new -- arguably derivative -- works on an industrial scale, not just single copies for personal use.