Groundbreaking Court Rulings Could Upend the Future of AI Training and Copyright—What You Need to Know Now

Groundbreaking Court Rulings Could Upend the Future of AI Training and Copyright—What You Need to Know Now

As noted in the Bartz case:

“Over time, Anthropic came to value most highly for its data mixes books like the ones Authors had written, and it valued them because of the creative expressions they contained. Claude’s customers wanted Claude to write as accurately and as compellingly as Authors. So, it was best to train the LLMs underlying Claude on works just like the ones Authors had written, with well-curated facts, well-organized analyses, and captivating narratives — above all with “good writing” of the kind “an editor would approve of.”… Anthropic could have trained its LLMs without using such books or any books at all. That would have required spending more on, say, staff writers to create competing exemplars of good writing, engineers to revise bad exemplars into better ones, energy bills to power more rounds of training and fine-tuning, and so on. Having canonical texts to draw upon helped.”

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

You May Have Missed