A Devil’s Bargain With OpenAI
It does all feel a bit like publishers are making a deal with—well, can I say it? The red guy with a pointy tail and two horns?
It does all feel a bit like publishers are making a deal with—well, can I say it? The red guy with a pointy tail and two horns?
Altman was on his world tour during much of the casting process and not intimately involved.
“OpenAI has permission to display content from News Corp mastheads in response to user questions and to enhance its products.” What that possibly means: The models can be trained on News Corp articles, answer queries using that info, and cite sources.
Ms Johansson had a few piquant observations about the ownership of her voice – and OpenAI’s attempts to negotiate the use of her voice. Then what happened after those negotiations failed.
“Hello Mods, We have received a copyright complaint from openai.com alleging unauthorized use of their copyrighted logos in r/ChatGPT. The ‘subreddit profile image’ does make use of the copyrighted content, which can lead to user confusion: please address the unauthorized copyrighted elements by May 16.”
Stack Overflow’s partnership with OpenAI also follows the LLM company’s recent push for increased partnerships and marquee deals, including their major announcement of a $100 billion datacenter to be built with Microsoft.
The FT writes in a press release that ChatGPT users will see summaries, quotes, and links to its articles. Any prompt that returns information from the FT will be attributed to the publication.
Wisely AI has identified five risks associated with the use of Generative AI in organisations. In this white paper, we provide guidance on how to mitigate these risks.
The startup opined that the broadsheet’s evidence “appears to have been prolonged and extensive efforts to hack OpenAI’s models,” and denied that ChatGPT could divert people around paywalls, adding that folks don’t use the chatbot to read articles…
“With the infrastructure in place—the base generative models from OpenAI, Google, Meta, and a handful of others—people other than the ones who built it will start using and misusing it in ways its makers never dreamed of.”
This well-observed essay points out that critique of AI has dropped into a dwell-state of some oversimplified categories…
Microsoft’s AI-powered Copilots are changing the way we work, making customers more efficient while unlocking new levels of creativity. While these transformative tools open doors to new possibilities, they are also raising new questions. Some customers are concerned about the risk of IP infringement claims if they use the output produced by generative AI. This is understandable, given recent public inquiries by authors and artists regarding how their own work is being used in conjunction with AI models and services.
To address this customer concern, Microsoft is announcing our new Copilot Copyright Commitment. As customers ask whether they can use Microsoft’s Copilot services and the output they generate without worrying about copyright claims, we are providing a straightforward answer: yes, you can, and if you are challenged on copyright grounds, we will assume responsibility for the potential legal risks involved.
This new commitment extends our existing intellectual property indemnity support to commercial Copilot services and builds on our previous AI Customer Commitments. Specifically, if a third party sues a commercial customer for copyright infringement for using Microsoft’s Copilots or the output they generate, we will defend the customer and pay the amount of any adverse judgments or settlements that result from the lawsuit, as long as the customer used the guardrails and content filters we have built into our products.
If nine experts in privacy can’t understand what Microsoft does with your data, what chance does the average person have?