Technology

AFAIK in general usage one popular argument is that genral LLM outputs only correspond a small percentage of infringing data due to dilution from their massive datasets (wish i could find the article this was from). A model can produce infringing content but in general its output likely doesnt infringe (or so the argument goes) so I think the current standard is verifying output is not infringing over copyright controls over all LLM outputs (aka the whole "you're responsible for your code" thing)

This doesnt change the fact a non-negligible portion of their dataset was obtained illegally however...

Lawyer-turned-software-developer.

Are you the inverse of lawtechie from reddit?

It really seems like way too many people are just kinda going "eh, everyone else is doing it. It'd be impossible for the courts to force us to reverse course on this now." Like, there's no way the monkey is going to get the cork back in, might as well just get used to being covered in shit.

I'm more miffed about GPL or copyleft code going to proprietary software and then being profited from without any attribution. It's a poison pill.