Comedian Sarah Silverman is one of three people suing OpenAI, the company behind AI chatbot ChatGPT for copyright infringement.
The three plaintiffs allege that when prompted, ChatGPT will produce a summary of their works. They claim this is copyright infringement, as they did not consent to their books being fed to ChatGPT.
How can they have a case? How many sites, interviews, social media posts have content that goes over summaries of their books?
Silverman herself has probably gone over the book context in enough posts and press releases/interviews to give ChatGPT all the context it needs.
Previous discussions in the same community
This would be interesting if this works out. This type of AI is pretty much ingest everything and combine all that knowledge into a new work or summary. I can’t wait to see how much can(not?) fall under fair use.
It looks like they read your material, until you ask more questions and it starts hallucinating bullshit, like a kid pretending that he read a book for English class, but only read Cliff’s notes.
