TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Copyright Liability on LLMs Should Mostly Fall on the Prompter, Not the Service

4 pointsby unixfgover 1 year ago

2 comments

andy99over 1 year ago
100% I&#x27;ve been saying the same thing for some time. Very happy to hear a lawyer agreeing.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.marble.onl&#x2F;posts&#x2F;general_technology_doesnt_violate_copyright.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.marble.onl&#x2F;posts&#x2F;general_technology_doesnt_viola...</a>
ggmover 1 year ago
In the spirit of &quot;don&#x27;t think about cabbages&quot; I want you to think about any movie or cartoon character still under copyright and imagine them doing something. And if one of you writes it down and lodges it online.. Anything beyond fair use length. There. Either, you, or me, of both of us just broke IPR.<p>What? You mean I have to &quot;express&quot; this idea by typing it into a production system? So.. if I ask a production system, to &quot;think&quot; about any IPR character it likes. And construct a scenario, have I just committed IPR theft against all the IPR holders at one remove? How about if I chain the production systems and make one prompt the others, to prompt the others.. but at no time do I identify the IPR.<p>How can this be all on me? How not? Maybe.. the IPR is broken in the expression not the instruction. In which case deciding most of it is in the prompt not the production seems a bit odd.<p>Note, I do not think these llms and gpt systems have personhood, or own any IPR they create, independently of the entities which operate them.
评论 #38896477 未加载