this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
2 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

0 readers
13 users here now

Everything about privacy (the confidentiality pillar of security) -- but not restricted to infosec. Offline privacy is also relevant here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
2
This should be more than enough to shown that copyright holders and media publishers are no friends of users. Quite the opposite! They're only friends of MONEY - specially when it comes in the form of (tldr.nettime.org)
submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
2 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This should be more than enough to shown that copyright holders and media publishers are no friends of users. Quite the opposite! They're only friends of MONEY - specially when it comes in the form of semi-eternal rents.Intellectual Property is theft (from the Commons).

"The court order came after news organizations expressed concern that people using ChatGPT to skirt paywalls "might be more likely to 'delete all [their] searches' to cover their tracks," OpenAI explained. Evidence to support that claim, news plaintiffs argued, was missing from the record because so far, OpenAI had only shared samples of chat logs that users had agreed that the company could retain. Sharing the news plaintiffs' concerns, the judge, Ona Wang, ultimately agreed that OpenAI likely would never stop deleting that alleged evidence absent a court order, granting news plaintiffs' request to preserve all chats.

OpenAI argued the May 13 order was premature and should be vacated, until, "at a minimum," news organizations can establish a substantial need for OpenAI to preserve all chat logs. They warned that the privacy of hundreds of millions of ChatGPT users globally is at risk every day that the "sweeping, unprecedented" order continues to be enforced.

"As a result, OpenAI is forced to jettison its commitment to allow users to control when and how their ChatGPT conversation data is used, and whether it is retained," OpenAI argued.

Meanwhile, there is no evidence beyond speculation yet supporting claims that "OpenAI had intentionally deleted data," OpenAI alleged. And supposedly there is not "a single piece of evidence supporting" claims that copyright-infringing ChatGPT users are more likely to delete their chats.

"OpenAI did not 'destroy' any data, and certainly did not delete any data in response to litigation events," OpenAI argued. "The Order appears to have incorrectly assumed the contrary.""

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/06/openai-says-court-forcing-it-to-save-all-chatgpt-logs-is-a-privacy-nightmare/

#AI #GenerativeAI #OpenAI #Copyright #Surveillance #Privacy #IP

top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This seems like a Captain Obvious post. Copyright is literally there to protect the rights to make a profit on something. Of course a for-profit company in a Capitalist economy is going to try to make more profit.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

@[email protected] I don't think it's so obvious as that. At least AI companies are giving users the option of deleting their data. And they also allow users to make use of their services very much for free. Copyright companies don't care about that. They want total control so that every online use of the works they own must be licensed. They want everyone to pay a rent. The ideia that they value art, culture, knowledge or public enlightenment is just bullshit. Even more so for media companies such as The New York Times which are always stating that they're essential to Democracy.