‘Neo-Nazi madness’: Meta’s top AI lawyer on why the company was fired

The only exception to this is UMG vs. Anthropy In this case, because at least early on, previous releases of Anthropic would have created the lyrics for the songs on the output. This is a problem. The current status of this case is that they have put safeguards in place to try to prevent that from happening, and the parties have sort of agreed that pending resolution of the case, those safeguards are sufficient, so they are no longer seeking a preliminary injunction.

Ultimately, the toughest question for AI companies isn’t Is it legal to participate in training? that it What do you do when your AI produces output that is very similar to a particular job?

Do you expect the majority of these cases to be referred to trial, or are there settlements on the horizon?

There may be some settlements. I expect to see settlements with big players that either have large areas of content or particularly valuable content. The New York Times may end up with a settlement, a licensing agreement, perhaps where OpenAI pays money to use the New York Times’ content.

There’s enough money at stake that maybe we’ll at least get some rulings that set the bar. The plaintiffs in the class action, I feel like they have stars in their eyes. There are a lot of class actions, and I think the defendants will fight them and hope to win summary judgment. It is not clear that they will be prosecuted. Supreme Court in Google vs. Oracle This case pushed the fair use law very strongly in the direction of being resolved on summary judgment, rather than before a jury. I believe that AI companies will do their best to reach a decision in these cases under summary judgment.

Why would it be better for them to win summary judgment versus a jury verdict?

It is faster and cheaper than going to trial. AI companies worry that they won’t be seen as popular, which many people will think they are. Oh, you made a copy of a work that should be illegal And not delving into the details of the fair use principle.

There have been a lot of deals between artificial intelligence companies and… Mediaand content providers and other rights holders. Most of the time, these deals seem to be more about research than basic models, or at least that’s what was described to me. In your opinion, is licensing of content to be used in AI search engines – where answers are obtained by Augmented Retrieval Generation or RAG – legally mandatory? Why do they do it this way?

If you use enhanced retrieval for targeted, specific content, your fair use argument becomes more difficult. AI-generated search is more likely to generate text taken directly from a given source in the output, and this is unlikely to be fair use. i mean it He could It is – but the risky area is that it will likely compete with the original source material. If instead of directing people to the New York Times story, I give them my AI prompt that uses RAG to pull text directly from the New York Times story, this seems like an alternative that could hurt the New York Times. The legal risks are greater for an AI company.

What do you want people to know about AI-generated copyright battles that they may not already know, or may have been misinformed about?

Something I often hear that is technically wrong is the concept that these are just plagiarism machines. All they do is take my stuff and grind it back up into text and replies. I hear a lot of artists say that, and I hear a lot of regular people say that, and it’s not technically true. You can decide whether generative AI is good or bad. You can decide it is legal or illegal. But it’s actually something completely new that we’ve never experienced before. The fact that they need to be trained on a range of content to understand how sentences work, how to make arguments, and understand different facts about the world doesn’t mean that they just kind of copy and paste things or create collages. It really generates things that no one could expect or predict, and gives us a lot of new content. I think this is important and valuable.