Non sono una giurista ma credo che questa rassegna possa essere utile alla discussione
https://www.thefashionlaw.com/from-chatgpt-to-deepfake-creating-apps-a-running-list-of-key-ai-lawsuits/ Saluti Rossana Morriello -----Messaggio originale----- Da: nexa <nexa-boun...@server-nexa.polito.it> Per conto di Stefano Quintarelli Inviato: venerdì 29 settembre 2023 15:21 Cc: Nexa <nexa@server-nexa.polito.it> Oggetto: Re: [nexa] ‘Biggest act of copyright theft in history’: thousands of Australian books allegedly used to train AI model | Australia news | The Guardian Ho una domanda per i giuristi (anzi, piu' di una) per allenare un modello, ho bisogno di un file con la versione digitale di un testo. (cosnsidero ovviamente testi non PD, CC0, ecc.) la versione digitale di un testo la posso ottenere da un ebook (gia' digitale), togliendo il probabile DRM. ma un ebook non e' unbene ma e' un servizio soggetto a licenza d'uso, quindi se non e' prevista nella licenza d'uso la facolta' di estrarre il testo digitale per allenarci un modello, mi sembra che ci sia gia' una violazione della licenza, per cui, credo, non possa essere usato come base di un allenamento, tanto piu' se il fine di tale allenamento e' commerciale (se vendo un servizio basato su quel modello). se e' cosi', per allenare il mio modello devo allora prednere il testo digitale facendo scan/ocr di un testo cartaceo. ma cio' e' possibile, se non erro, solo per uso personale e non commerciale. se questo e' corretto, non mi pare ci sia un modo per prendere un testo digitale senza infrangere una licenza d'uso/copyright dove e' la fallacia del ragionamento ? grazie, s. On 29/09/23 15:00, Stefano Borroni Barale wrote: > Buongiorno lista, > >> L'idea che istruire un modello su dei testi coperti da copyright sia >> una violazione del suddetto copyright è altamente opinabile > > Fin qui, ho l'impressione che tutti i legali in lista concorderanno. > >> ragionamento è in realtà abbastanza semplice: se istruirsi su un >> testo ne violasse il copyright, saremmo tutti dei criminali. > > Ma siccome noi siamo umani e quello che produciamo non è - salvo i discorsi > dei politici(*) - ontologicamente identico alla produzione di esseri tecnici > non viventi, logica vuole che quanto si applica a noi non possa applicarsi a > un LLM, tanto quanto la legge sul copyright non si applica pedissequamente > all'utilizzo di testi umani per creare modelli linguistici. > > Questo è il motivo per il quale tutti i tentativi di "proteggere via > copyright" il prodotto di software generativi sono falliti miseramente, e con > motivazioni scritte in sentenze; che per il diritto credo abbiano un peso > assai maggiore del sito di CC. > > La mia impressione è che la questione terrà impegnati legali, informatici, > filosofi e società ancora moooooolto a lungo. > SBB > > (*) Come sanno bene i bambini degli anni '80 che hanno giocato con > questo spassoso giocattolo: > https://www.enricodalbosco.it/giochi/tubolario/ > > > Di quei testi >> non c'è fisicamente traccia all'interno dei modelli, non viene >> copiato niente. I modelli sono un'opera trasformativa di quei testi, >> non derivativa. >> >> Lo argomenta molto bene Creative Commons: >> https://creativecommons.org/2023/02/17/fair-use-training-generative-a >> i/ >> >> Detto questo, cito le parole di un altro autore, Jeff Jarvis: >> https://www.facebook.com/jeff.jarvis/posts/pfbid0LMFeqdTYoxnGHQAZwp5H >> MmeeVqgMSjL2dkcwMcBojkb2cinBpgYTHyc7Fhq1B9NPl >> >> «I, for one, am not complaining about my books being in in large >> language model training sets. I write to enter ideas into public >> discourse. I prefer informed over ignorant AI. I believe it is fair >> use for anyone to read & use books for transformative work. In fact, >> I'd probably feel snubbed if my books were not there. I'm happy when >> they are in libraries. I'm fine that they're here.» >> >> Fabio >> >> Il giorno ven 29 set 2023 alle ore 07:52 Alberto Cammozzo via nexa >> nexa@server-nexa.polito.it ha scritto: >> >>> https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/28/australian-bo >>> oks-training-ai-books3-stolen-pirated >>> >>> Thousands of books from some of Australia’s most celebrated authors have >>> potentially been caught up in what Booker prize-winning novelist Richard >>> Flanagan has called “the biggest act of copyright theft in history”. >>> >>> The works have allegedly been pirated by the US-based Books3 dataset and >>> used to train generative AI for corporations such as Meta and Bloomberg. >>> >>> Flanagan, who found 10 of his works, including the multi-international >>> award-winning 2013 novel The Narrow Road to the Deep North, on the Books3 >>> dataset, told Guardian Australia he was deeply shocked by the discovery >>> made several days ago. >>> >>> “I felt as if my soul had been strip mined and I was powerless to stop it,” >>> he said in a statement. >>> >>> “This is the biggest act of copyright theft in history.” >>> >>> AI could ‘turbo-charge fraud’ and be monopolised by tech companies, >>> Andrew Leigh warns >>> >>> The Australian Publishers Association confirmed to Guardian Australia on >>> Wednesday that as many as 18,000 fiction and nonfiction titles with >>> Australian ISBNs (unique international standard book numbers) appeared to >>> be affected by the copyright infringement, although it is not yet clear >>> what proportion of these are Australian editions of internationally >>> authored books. >>> >>> “We’re still working through [the data] to work out the impact in terms of >>> Australian authors,” APA spokesperson Stuart Glover said. >>> >>> “This is a massive legal and ethical challenge for the publishing industry >>> and for authors globally.” >>> >>> A search tool published on Monday by US media platform The Atlantic and >>> uploaded by the US Authors Guild on Wednesday revealed the works of Peter >>> Carey, Helen Garner, Kate Grenville, Anna Funder, Christos Tsiolkas and >>> Thomas Keneally, as well as Flanagan and dozens of other high-profile >>> Australian authors, were included in the pirated dataset containing more >>> than 180,000 titles. >>> >>> On Thursday, the Australian Society of Authors issued a statement saying it >>> was “horrified” to learn that the works of Australian writers were being >>> used to train artificial intelligence without permission from the authors. >>> >>> ASA chief executive, Olivia Lanchester, described the Books3 dataset as >>> piracy on an industrial scale. >>> >>> “Authors appropriately feel outraged,” Lanchester said. “The fact is this >>> technology relies upon books, journals, essays written by authors, yet >>> permission was not sought nor compensation granted.” >>> >>> Lanchester said the Australian literary industry, while not objecting per >>> se to emerging technologies such as AI, was deeply concerned about the lack >>> of transparency evident in the development and monetisation of AI by global >>> tech companies. >>> >>> “Turning a blind eye to the legitimate rights of copyright owners threatens >>> to diminish already precarious creative careers,” she said. >>> >>> “The enrichment of a few powerful companies is at the cost of thousands of >>> individual creators. This is not how a fair market functions.” >>> >>> Josephine Johnston, chief executive of Australia’s Copyright Agency, >>> described the Books3 development as “a free kick to big tech” at the >>> expense of Australia’s creative and cultural life. >>> >>> “We’re going to need greater transparency – how these tools have been >>> developed, trained, how they operate – before people can truly understand >>> what their legal rights might be,” she said. >>> >>> “We seem to be in this terrible position now where content owners – >>> remembering that the vast majority of them will be individual authors – may >>> actually have to take out court cases to enforce their rights.” >>> >>> Australian copyright law protects creators of original content from data >>> scraping. >>> >>> Litigation in the US against ChatGPT creator OpenAI over use of allegedly >>> pirated book datasets, Books1 and Books2 (which do not appear to be >>> affiliated with Books3) has already commenced. >>> >>> In July, North American horror/fantasy writers Mona Awad (author of Bunny) >>> and Paul Tremblay (author of The Cabin at the End of the World) filed a >>> lawsuit in a San Francisco federal court, alleging ChatGPT unlawfully >>> digested their books as part of its AI training data. >>> >>> On 28 August, OpenAI filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that >>> the authors “misconceive the scope of copyright, failing to take into >>> account the limitations and exceptions (including fair use) that properly >>> leave room for innovations like the large language models now at the >>> forefront of artificial intelligence”. >>> >>> On 19 September the Writers Guild and 17 of its members, including >>> bestselling novelists John Grisham, George RR Martin and Jodi Picoult, >>> filed a complaint in a New York district court against OpenAI, seeking >>> redress for “flagrant and harmful infringements” of guild members’ >>> registered copyrights. >>> >>> In a statement on its website, the guild says while it is aware that >>> companies such as Meta and Bloomberg have used the Books3 dataset to train >>> their LLMs, it is not yet clear whether OpenAI is using Books3 to train its >>> ChatGPT models GPT 3.5 or GPT 4. >>> >>> Democracies face ‘truth decay’ as AI blurs fact and fiction, warns >>> head of Australia’s military >>> >>> Guardian Australia has sought comment from OpenAI, which has yet to >>> officially respond to the guild’s complaint, and Meta. >>> >>> On 4 September, US technology magazine Wired reported that a Danish >>> anti-piracy group called Rights Alliance had been told by Bloomberg that >>> the company did not plan to train future versions of its BloombergGPT using >>> Books3. >>> >>> Bloomberg declined to respond to the Guardian’s queries. >>> >>> The APA said the global nature of the issue would present significant >>> challenges in enforcement and prosecution, and has joined the authors’ >>> society in calling for AI technologies to be regulated. >>> >>> Consultation closed last month for a Department of Industry, Science and >>> Resources discussion paper on supporting responsible AI. >>> >>> A parliamentary inquiry is under way examining the use of generative >>> artificial intelligence in the Australian education system. >>> >>> Flanagan said it was up to the Australian government to act to protect >>> Australia’s writers. >>> >>> “It has power and we do not,” he said. >>> >>> “If it cares for our culture it must now stand up and fight for it.” >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> nexa mailing list >>> nexa@server-nexa.polito.it >>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa@server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa@server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa _______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa _______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
