The actual title is: “Anthropic wins key US ruling on AI training in authors' copyright lawsuit”
pyman · 2h ago
The most important part of the ruling is the revelation that Anthropic pirated 7 million books.
So, why did you change the focus of the debate? We're not allowed to talk about copyright infringement on this site?
That's just wrong.
dragonwriter · 2h ago
The HN Guidelines, after some notes about removing site names and gratuitous numbers and adjectives, specifies that otherwise, the original title should be used without clickbait and that submission titles should not be editorialized.
pyman · 2h ago
I didn't know about this. Appreciate you pointing it out.
pyman · 10h ago
If found guilty of willful copyright infringement, Anthropic could be ordered to pay up to $150,000 per work. Since the judge said they pirated over 7 million books, the maximum potential liability would be $1.05 trillion.
dragonwriter · 1h ago
While the giant numbers of maximum penalties are perennially popular, it may be interesting to note that the minimum statutory damages if Anthropic is found to have pirated that many works inncocently is $2.1 billion, and non-innocently $5.25 billion.
bediger4000 · 9h ago
Given what we've seen in terms of RIAA and MPAA prosecuting small numbers of copies of songs or movies, Anthropic is guilty of copyright infringement. Will it be found guilty? Probably not. There's a high court for the wealthy, and a low court for the rest of us.
So, why did you change the focus of the debate? We're not allowed to talk about copyright infringement on this site?
That's just wrong.