Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
ellipsus.com | ||
| | | | |
www.theverge.com
|
|
| | | | | Meta and Anthropic both triumphed in a pair of copyright cases, but with major caveats. | |
| | | | |
www.noorjahanrahman.com
|
|
| | | | | Recently I teamed up with a colleague at Willkie, Farr & Gallagher to write a paper for GenLaw, a workshop on the intersection of AI and law, hosted by the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML). You can read our essay on the GenLaw website, or below: 1. Introduction A question that has been top of mind for many proprietors of large language models (LLMs) is whether training the models on copyrighted text qualifies as fair use. The fair use doctrine allows limited use of copyrigh | |
| | | | |
terribleminds.com
|
|
| | | | | The tl;dr before you get into this post is this: the SFWA came out, said that some AI usage was okay enough in books for the authors of those books to not to be disqualified from winning a Nebula a... | |
| | | | |
futurism.com
|
|
| | | In a surprising reversal, the AI company Anthropic has agreed to settle a suit by the authors of books it used to train its Claude chatbot. | ||
