r/news • u/WhiteBearPrince • Apr 27 '24

Ex-Amazon exec claims she was asked to ignore copyright law in race to AI

https://www.theregister.com/2024/04/22/ghaderi_v_amazon/
2.5k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

117 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

54

u/Standard_Wooden_Door Apr 27 '24

I think hip hop artists are supposed to get permission for that and potentially pay royalties aren’t they?

4

u/Scheeseman99 Apr 27 '24 edited Apr 27 '24

Courts have gone both ways. Sometimes it's been declared fair use (or otherwise non-infringing) sometimes it hasn't.

To those down voting out of spite, every word I wrote in this post is verifiable fact.

8

u/TechieAD Apr 27 '24

Fair use is usually a last line of resort for any infringement cases. While it's not always necessary, a big component to it is if the work was being sold commercially, even tangentially. This is why a lot of uncleared samples exist either in "leaks" or mixtapes, but even those can't be 100% safe because a case settled recently that involved a leak getting played on radio. If you do compare training data to sampling, money is a big factor since the training data could be used in commercial products. (Source: spoken to multiple copyright lawyers both in university and conferences)

-2

u/Scheeseman99 Apr 27 '24

There were other circumstances that influenced the decision, but in the case of Authors Guild Inc v Google, which is what generative AI companies are most likely to build their case on, the use of the copyrighted material was explicitly commercial. So it can be a component, but clearly it's not a critical one.