The narrative that OpenAI, Microsoft, and freshly minted White House “AI czar” David Sacks are now pushing to explain why DeepSeek was able to create a large language model that outpaces OpenAI’s while spending orders of magnitude less money and using older chips is that DeepSeek used OpenAI’s data unfairly and without compensation. Sound familiar?

Both Bloomberg and the Financial Times are reporting that Microsoft and OpenAI have been probing whether DeepSeek improperly trained the R1 model that is taking the AI world by storm on the outputs of OpenAI models.

It is, as many have already pointed out, incredibly ironic that OpenAI, a company that has been obtaining large amounts of data from all of humankind largely in an “unauthorized manner,” and, in some cases, in violation of the terms of service of those from whom they have been taking from, is now complaining about the very practices by which it has built its company.

OpenAI is currently being sued by the New York Times for training on its articles, and its argument is that this is perfectly fine under copyright law fair use protections.

“Training AI models using publicly available internet materials is fair use, as supported by long-standing and widely accepted precedents. We view this principle as fair to creators, necessary for innovators, and critical for US competitiveness,” OpenAI wrote in a blog post. In its motion to dismiss in court, OpenAI wrote “it has long been clear that the non-consumptive use of copyrighted material (like large language model training) is protected by fair use.”

OpenAI argues that it is legal for the company to train on whatever it wants for whatever reason it wants, then it stands to reason that it doesn’t have much of a leg to stand on when competitors use common strategies used in the world of machine learning to make their own models.

  • Rooty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I love how die hard free market defenders turn into fuming protectionists the second their hegemony is threatened.

  • fallowseed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    13 hours ago

    everyone concerned about their privacy going to china-- look at how easy it is to get it from the hands of our overlord spymasters who’ve already snatched it from us.

  • maplebar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    If these guys thought they could out-bootleg the fucking Chinese then I have an unlicensed t-shirt of Nicky Mouse with their name on it.

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    DeepSeek’s specific trained model is immaterial—they could take it down tomorrow and never provide access again, and the damage to OpenAI’s business would already be done.

    DeepSeek’s model is just a proof-of-concept—the point is that any organization with a few million dollars and some (hopefully less-problematical) training data can now make their own model competitive with OpenAI’s.

    • MysticKetchup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 day ago

      I feel like I didn’t appreciate this movie enough when I first watched it but it only gets better as I get older

      • just_another_person@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s a true comedy that still holds up. I honestly thought for years that Mel Brooks had something to do with it, but he didn’t. It’s so well crafted that there are many layers to it that you can’t even grasp when watching as a child. Seeing it as an adult just open your eyes to how amazingly well done it was.

        I could do without the whole Billy Crystalizing of large portions of it though.

  • mechoman444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I can’t believe we’re still on this nonsense about AI stealing data for training.

    I’ve had this argument so many times before y’all need to figure out which data you want free and which data do you want to pay for because you can’t have it both ways.

    Either the data is free or it’s paid for. For everyone including individuals and corporations.

    You can’t have data be free for some people and be paid for for others it doesn’t work that way we don’t have the infrastructure to support this kind of thing.

    For example Wikipedia can’t make its data available for AI training for a price and free for everyone else. You can just go to wikipedia.com and read all the data that you want. It’s available for free there’s no paywall there’s no subscriptions no account to make no password to put in no username to think of.

    Either all data is free or it’s all paid for.

    • Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I mean, sure, but the issue is that the rules aren’t being applied on the same level. The data in question isn’t free for you, it’s not free for me, but it’s free for OpenAI. They don’t face any legal consequences, whereas humans in the USA are prosecuted including an average fine per human of $266,000 and an average prison sentence of 25 months.

      OpenAI has pirated, violated copyright, and distributed more copyright than an i divided human is reasonably capable of, and faces no consequences.

      https://www.splaw.us/blog/2021/02/looking-into-statistics-on-copyright-violations/

      https://www.patronus.ai/blog/introducing-copyright-catcher

      My use of the term “human” is awkward, but US law considers corporations people, so i tried to differentiate.

      I’m in favour of free and open data, but I’m also of the opinion that the rules should apply to everyone.

    • LengAwaits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      I tend to think that information should be free, generally, so I would probably be fine with “OpenAI the non-profit” taking copyrighted data under fair-use, but I don’t extend that thinking to “OpenAI the for-profit company”.

  • BertramDitore@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Corporate media take note. This is how you do reality-based reporting. None of the both-sides bullshit trying to justify or make excuses, just laughing in the face of absurd hypocrisy. This is a well-respected journalist confronting a truth we can all plainly see. See? The truth doesn’t need to be boring or bland or “balanced” by disingenuous attempts to see the other side.

    I will explain what this means in a moment, but first: Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahhahahahahahahahahahahaha. It is, as many have already pointed out, incredibly ironic that OpenAI, a company that has been obtaining large amounts of data from all of humankind largely in an “unauthorized manner,” and, in some cases, in violation of the terms of service of those from whom they have been taking from, is now complaining about the very practices by which it has built its company.

    • 0x0@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 day ago

      Good that 404 are unafraid of tackling issues, but tbh i find the “hahaha” unprofessional and dispense with the informal tone in news.

      • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        18 hours ago

        It’s just… So deserved, you know? Sometimes you can’t but laugh in the face of such karma and fucking irony.

      • BertramDitore@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 day ago

        I definitely understand that reaction. It does give off a whiff of unprofessionalism, but their reporting is so consistently solid that I’m willing to give them the space to be a little more human than other journalists. If it ever got in the way of their actual journalism I’d say they should quit it, but that hasn’t happened so far.

  • humble peat digger@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Thank you China.
    No for real - it’s either EU or frigging china that helps us with these oligarch overlords