Hi, this is Wayne again with a topic “OpenAI Responds to Lawsuit”.
Jump right into our first topic today, which is open ai’s defense against the New York Times lawsuit. They publicly called the copyright claim against them, meritless and disappointing. Yes, according to open AI, the only way the times could have gotten chat, GPT to produce verbatim sections of their copy. Writed text that it was trained on would have been by manipulating the prompts, with the spefic specific intent to get that kind of result. What meanies? What what mean people open AI has also recently stated that it would be impossible to create a useful llm without some amount of copyrighted material, because most forms of human expression are either copyrighted or extremely old.
So your honor there meritless and also disappointing. I did. I didn’t do anything wrong because I had to do it. I had to do it yeah if I hadn’t done it.
Otherwise, how would I have built this business and made all this money? If I didn’t steal the plutonium I couldn’t have made the bomb right. So now we’ve got the bomb and what you want me to apologize for, taking the plutonium, that’s meritless, I mean I I’m sorry, I kind of I kind of okay. I set this up as the headline topic and I made it like the title of the stream and everything cuz. I was kind of thinking we’d be able to Riff on this for a while, but it really does seem kind of open and shut.
Doesn’T it uh? Your honor um, you know, given that the desired result was for him to be dead, uh, I’m afraid there was simply no way to do that without killing him. Therefore, this murder trial is both meritless and, if I could speak frankly, disappointed – and we know guys – we know that them saying meritless and disappointing we’re at different points in time. Whatever we’re we’re. Yes, it doesn’t matter clearly laughing. The point is that open AI clearly has no actual defense whatsoever or – or this is Sam Alman playing 5D chess coming up with the worst possible argument that he can up front so that the New York Times lawyers will go all right. Well, why don’t we knock off for yeah? Why don’t we knock off for a 6mon lunch and we’re just going to cruise into the courtroom? Say uh yo your honor they’re, the bad guys and everything will be fine and we’re going to win this thing like maybe they have some kind of some kind of Ace up their butt crack.
That is incredible. It’S like the Ace of nuggets I was like. Where is he, where is he possibly going with this one? Well, there’s, certainly no diamonds! There I’ll tell you that for sure, oh man, oh boy, they should probably they should probably use chat GPT to come up with a better defense.
Oh, oh! No, that would be really interesting man. I love that I’m trying to think of like oh, like I know, okay, I I, like you, can’t possibly charge me with corporate espionage. I mean, if I didn’t, take the current stuff.
Everything else is everything. That’S that’s not currently. Under NDA is old, like I, I come on, I’m going to ask chat GPT what its legal defense is in this situation and see what it says. Okay, I’m very excited for this. It’S going to take me a sec. In the meantime, I’ve stalled long enough Luke.
What did chat GPT suggest for open ai’s defense? It suggested six different approaches wow, something that I think is is actually quite interesting. Is that one of them actually somewhat lines up with what happened. Uh, which is public interest.
Uh argue that the development of AI has significant public interest benefits like advancing technology, Education and Research, which might be considered in the context of fair use, wow. Okay. What else has it got? Well, it also says fair use Doctrine in general.
Transformative use minimal, use public interest, no direct copying and precedent and legal ambiguity. No direct copying says emphasized that AI, that the AI model doesn’t store or reproduce verbatim copies of the text, but generates new original content based on the patterns learned during training. Okay, so there’s some more plausible defenses in there yeah other than sorry your honor. We had to do it.
Otherwise, how would we have achieved our goal? Yeah? What? What do you even mean yeah, I mean some of them are basically that with extra steps, but I think they more or less all are, but it is what it is. .