Discussion
Loading...

Discussion

  • About
  • Code of conduct
  • Privacy
  • Users
  • Instances
  • About Bonfire
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org  ·  activity timestamp 3 weeks ago

30. A US federal district court just ruled that paraphrases or summaries by the #AI tool #Cohere might infringe publisher copyrights on the original full texts.
https://copyrightlately.com/court-rules-ai-news-summaries-may-infringe-copyright/

Here's the Nov 17 decision by the federal district court for the Southern District of NY.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69636122/59/advance-local-media-llc-v-cohere-inc/

PS: This could undermine my thesis in this thread. But it doesn't undermine it yet. As I pointed out in the second post, "If a paraphrase doesn't use the original expression or track it too closely, then it doesn't infringe. If it does track the original too closely, it might count as a derivative work." The question in this case is whether some Cohere summaries were too close to the originals. Cohere lost a motion to dismiss, and now the court will investigate the "substantial similarity" claims on the merits. If the publishers win, we'll learn more about where the line is, not that there is no line.

#AI #Copyright #Paraphrases #Summaries

  • Copy link
  • Flag this post
  • Block
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 2 weeks ago

31. Another US federal judge has ruled (Oct 27) that AI-generated summaries might infringe the copyrights on the original works.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.606655/gov.uscourts.nysd.606655.716.0.pdf

Again, the AI company (in this case #OpenAI) has merely lost a motion to dismiss. The court has not yet ruled on the merits.

Again, I acknowledge that if this result survives, it would undermine my thesis in this thread.

My take is that it won't survive because it disregards the idea/expression distinction fundamental to copyright law. Or if it does survive, it will overturn the fundamentals of copyright law.

Here are some comments that support my take.

From @mmasnick:
https://matthewsag.com/copyright-winter-is-coming-to-wikipedia/

From @mmasnick:
https://www.techdirt.com/2025/11/18/book-reports-potentially-copyright-infringing-thanks-to-court-attacks-on-llms/

From @drewwilsonfl:
https://www.freezenet.ca/judge-rules-summaries-are-copyright-infringement-because-common-sense-is-over-rated/

#Copyright #Paraphrases #Summaries

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
poritzj
@poritzj@mastodon.social replied  ·  activity timestamp 2 weeks ago

@petersuber @mmasnick

There's a basic problem for the line of reasoning in this thread, Peter: LLMs are next-token probability maximizers, they do not even attempt to represent the underlying *ideas*. There is a religion (based on a simplistic reading of some old science fiction novels) espoused by tech broligarchs which asserts that at a large enough scale, intelligence/underlying ideas/AGI will just *emerge*, 1/4

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
poritzj
@poritzj@mastodon.social replied  ·  activity timestamp 2 weeks ago

@petersuber @mmasnick

But there is no evidence that this is happening even at the planet-destroying scales Silicon Valley is building.

In terms of the copyright's idea/expression distinction: LLMs were only ever designed to steal expression, when they output text which looks like an article summary it's a mere accident of stochastic remix of expression from the article and others which are similar at a token level. 2/4

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Log in

bonfire.cafe

A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate

bonfire.cafe: About · Code of conduct · Privacy · Users · Instances
Bonfire social · 1.0.1-alpha.8 no JS en
Automatic federation enabled
  • Explore
  • About
  • Members
  • Code of Conduct
Home
Login