• Doug Holland@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is a pittance — about $3,000 per victim, for having their life’s work copied and distributed to, effectively, anyone and everyone on Earth.

  • BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    Cost of doing business.

    In reality proper punishment would be forbidding all models trained on copyrighted content from being monetized.

    That would actually hurt since the whole point was to build these models and just pay the fine

  • Harvey656@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    267
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    I would have something to say, but one of the comments in the article said it better than I could.

  • tty5@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    3 days ago

    Statutory damages are 150k per violation and that’s how much music industry often got in court per song. This settlement would cover 10K books at this rate, they downloaded over 7M.

    This settlement is 0.14% of what statutory damages would have been.

  • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    3 days ago

    Everyone is saying this isn’t anywhere near what they should be getting, and that’s true. But this also opens the door to further legal action from others infringed upon, increasing their likelihood of winning.

    If it were me I’d ask the judge to order payment immediately, before this bubble pops and they get nothing. It’s all a house of cards built on sand.

      • minorkeys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Is the selling of the use of the device trained on it a violation? Because it it should be. Is the use of the device to make money a violation? Because it should be.

        • quick_snail@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          No, not according to this ruling.

          The fine here was only because they pirated the books they used to train it on

  • FoxAlive@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    3 days ago

    They should be forced to remove all models that have said stolen content or can receive a fine that doubles in value for each violation afterwards. So if the fine exponentially grows larger the longer they choose to break the law. 1 million first fine, 2 million second. 4 the third, 8m the fourth time. etc, etc.

      • FoxAlive@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        3 days ago

        If they had to pay out royalties, or pay licensing fees to everyone they stole from, my whole perspectice on LLMs would be different.

        Or at least I would be less inclined to make some of the criticisms I have on it.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 days ago

      Then copyright doesn’t exist anymore either. You can’t have your cake and eat it

  • NekoKoneko@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    3 days ago

    Not favorable terms to them but…Gotta settle that suit quick so you can cash in with an IPO, before the bubble pops.

    Right now they’re settling at their inflated valuation so it’s all Monopoly money.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      How is this not favorable to them? They’re making off like bandits, AND setting a bad (for everyone else) precedent

      • NekoKoneko@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I agree, sorry for my poor writing. I mean to say, the dollar value and decision to settle at this stage on such a fundamental dispute to their business is atypical, and they only agreed to it because of their absolutely nonsense valuation and the IPO plans.