Close Menu
    🔍 OpenAI Just Lost a Copyright Case in Germany – Big Win for Creators?
    Futurology

    🔍 OpenAI Just Lost a Copyright Case in Germany – Big Win for Creators?


    Just dropped a full breakdown of the landmark court ruling where GEMA (Germany’s music rights society) sued OpenAI — and won.

    At the core of it: ChatGPT was allegedly trained on copyrighted song lyrics and could reproduce them. The Munich court ruled this was a breach of copyright. It's the first major European win against generative AI using protected content.

    My video breaks down:

    • What actually happened in court
    • Why OpenAI's defence didn’t hold up
    • The global ripple effects: NYT case, Stability AI, Suno, and more
    • What this means for devs, artists, and AI companies going forward

    📽️ [Watch the full breakdown here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnJ2-3oAy4M
    Would love to hear from builders and legal minds:
    Should AI companies have to pay for training data? Or does that kill innovation?

    🔍 OpenAI Just Lost a Copyright Case in Germany – Big Win for Creators?
    byu/Alive-AI inFuturology

    View 12 Comments

    12 Comments

    1. Evipicc on

      So the issue is the actual end results would have to ‘matter’. The training is done. It’s over with. If there’s just a fine, it means literally nothing.

    2. TraditionalBackspace on

      I mean, training an AI on non-public data is clearly infringement on a grand scale. I’m baffled that there haven’t been a flood of cases in the US.

    3. alexanderpas on

      AI should only be trained on public domain data, or data that they have a licence to use for (such as wikipedia)

      Copyright exists for a reason, and also expires for a reason.

    4. btoned on

      There is no big win no matter what in this regard anymore.

      This is no different than meta violating privacy, Google or Microsoft being monopolies, Amazon manipulating prices, etc.

      They will pay a joke of a fine equal to a days revenue and then go on to recoup it the following day.

      The law has beneath big tech. Period.

    5. TheRatingsAgency on

      I think it is rather wild when folks say that “it’s too hard for them to adhere to copyright, just think of what all that would do to AI progress” – like we all owe them our content to progress their shit. lol

      Folks act like indeed everything these orgs are creating is out in the open, but reality is there’s plenty they’re protecting, and if you got access to it you’d be sued.

      Face it, they’re all training on data they shouldn’t be getting access to without compensating the copyright holder, but we’re letting them off the hook because a) it’s hard, and b) too much $ is wrapped up in building AI to make some folks trillions.

    6. xXG0DLessXx on

      I think preventing training on copyrighted data is a bad idea. Instead they should look into forcing models trained with that data to be free and not profit off of other’s works.

    7. strangescript on

      I’m kind of curious what y’all think since this place ironically tends to be anti AI. Lets say we train a model on 100% public domain data and have a functional convo model. This is totally possible now. You ask it a question and it has a web search tool, so it looks up sources to answer your question.

      But then it stores that answer in a database and can now search that database for future questions. Is that okay?

      This is all 100% possible now.

    8. tachyonic_field on

      AI being trained on general population makes a good case to tax it to fund basic income to compensate for all lost jobs.

      Noosphere could be treated as another form of natural resource. No extraction without compensation.

    9. Loki-L on

      If using copyrighted data to train AI is legal, does that mean that you could upload and download whatever copyrighted materials you want as long as you put “for AI training” in brackets into the filename of the torrent.

      Can I claim I was using copyrighted material to train my personal meat based neural network that resides in my skull.

      How important is the A in AI for the purpose of this exception.

      In the distant future will uploading yourself be a get out of jail free card.

      None of the dystopia cyber punk novels, games and movies I have read, played and seen have prepared me for a future where robots had more rights than people.

    10. arothmanmusic on

      I watched a Sora video the other day that included a known piece of music, note-for-note. Like, indistinguishable from the source material. OpenAI will be paying lawsuits and electricity bills faster than it can ever make a profit.

    11. dekc_bu on

      Not a lawyer or pro/against AI.

      I see those discussions often and I just wonder if at some point they can get away with it?

      Let’s say you’re a guitarist and you train on only 3/4 artists, if your music is then similar is that copyright infringement?

      Or you’re a painter and mimic other painters, and so on…

      Probably I don’t understand when you cross a line that says you’re in breach of copyright

    12. periwnklz on

      there is so much evidence of copyrighted material in ChatGPT results. i teach college and have created assignments that obviously use textbook content that is supposed to be behind password-protected website. At the same time, some of the material LLMs access comes from nefarious dark websites. we should pump the breaks on AI use until they do the right thing and do better on copyright…as well as misinformation feeding the AI machine.