I wonder if OpenAI could use a novel defence of “we’re just using it to train AI for better hardware intelligence. Fair use.”

It seems to have played out decently in courts so far.

▲

nrmitchi a day ago | parent [-]

If Apple had published all of the details/data publicly, then they publicly could.

But that is not the claim, and no one is even pretending that that's what happened.

▲

dannyw a day ago | parent [-]

The idea of companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, but also NVIDIA (so probably everyone) paying bitcoin (or having conversations about such at least) to 'fugitive sites' like Anna's Archive for a full download of their illegally acquired piracy archive would have been laughed out 5 years ago.

My post was more of a joke, how "AI training" is now a get-out-of-jail free card.

	▲	thewebguyd 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's probably not as much of a joke as we want to believe, given the current administration in power and the potential 5% stake in OpenAi via Kushner's firm, and how SamA can just pull the "national security...Chinese labs something something" argument along with some bribe money and potentially make this whole thing disappear. With the corruption so blatant and on public display now, and with how much the labs have been trying to sell "too big to fail" to the government, the standard rules no longer apply when it comes to anything involving these labs.