- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmit.online
You must log in or register to comment.
Interesting to see Lemmy users who are normally “information should be free” supporters suddenly support the copyright system
I know this has nothing to do with that, but the word publishers always reminds me of a thing.
FUCK YOU ELSEVIER
Why is a single payment for an arbitrary amount of money still enforced to the authors?
Anthropic should have all their models deleted so they start from the beginning following copyright laws.
The claimants have deemed it acceptable.
$1.5B, and they get to keep the knowledge, which will be distilled by future models for generations.
You will own nothing. Not even your own art.
Wow, so uh, that’s gonna come out to fractions of a cent on the dollar, in terms of actual revenue generated from flagrant copyright violations.
It is deeply infuriating how fundamentally our society is designed to protect of people and organizations that are already blindingly wealthy.
Will this perhaps set a precedent for future models where authors will be able to price their work differently?
Authors will receive next to nothing too :) Only publishers.
Just like God intended.
Fifty-four known class members and over 500,000 potential class members will each receive an estimated $3,100 per work, from approximately 482,000 works.
Still too low IMO but a big upgrade
Still, paying even just the $3000 for a single book from this lawsuit is going to be quite hard when you are making zero profit whatsoever. LLM AI was unprofitable when the training data was free, they are even more so if they have to pay even a cent per item. And I really doubt it’s going to stop with this one batch and payment and they can just go back to pirating the stuff for free.
Check if Anthropic owes you $3100 here: https://secure.anthropiccopyrightsettlement.com/lookup
Good link, but I don’t think that’s going to apply to any of us here 🤷♀️️
Lump sums are rookie numbers. Insist on percentage of revenue
Well in this case its lump sum or percentage of negative profit, so lump sum might be the better path here… Still not remotely enough compensation to the actual craters of the content they’ve stolen though.
That’s why fines should always be out of revenue, like the GDPR fines, and never profit. Just because the business you did illegally was bad business shouldn’t mean you don’t have to pay fines for it.
No, that’s entirely fair, and I agree should be the SOP. I was just thinking of the recent articles about how AI companies in general are hiding massive amounts of debt a-la Enron style, thus likely even their revenue figures are made up.
I wonder how the venture capital firms that fund Anthropic’s money-burning operation feel about this. “Oh look, now I know how that particular funding round’s money was actually spent. Fantastic.”
How much does this affect their bankruptcy estimate?
Just forwarded the search link to a friend. He coauthored a long out-of-date book on podcasting, and it’s on their list. A lot of these authors will get a nice bonus.
my company gonna sue them too
But this means there’s still no precedence, no?
Yes. A settlement means there was no finding, and no admission of guilt.
Thia is to settle their infringement from when they literally torrented giant chunks of their training corpus. It has nothing to do with any sort of infringement theory based on encoding learning from material but just old fashioned liability for flagrant piracy.
deleted by creator
