科技英語：OpenAI被起訴！

一個由主要新聞出版商組成的聯(lián)盟對 Microsoft 和 OpenAI 提起訴訟，指控這兩家科技巨頭在未經(jīng)許可或付款的情況下非法使用受版權(quán)保護(hù)的文章來訓(xùn)練他們的生成式 AI 模型。

First reported by The Verge, the group of eight publications owned by Alden Global Capital (AGC) – including the Chicago Tribune, New York Daily News, and Orlando Sentinel – allege the companies have purloined “millions” of their articles without permission and without payment “to fuel the commercialisation of their generative artificial intelligence products, including ChatGPT and Copilot.”
奧爾登全球資本 (AGC) 旗下的八家出版物（包括《芝加哥論壇報》、《紐約每日新聞》和《奧蘭多前哨報》）最先由 The Verge 報道，聲稱這些公司在未經(jīng)許可且未付款的情況下竊取了“數(shù)百萬”篇文章 “推動其生成人工智能產(chǎn)品的商業(yè)化，包括 ChatGPT 和 Copilot。”

The lawsuit is the latest legal action taken against Microsoft and OpenAI over their alleged misuse of copyrighted content to build large language models (LLMs) that power AI technologies like ChatGPT. In the complaint, the AGC publications claim the companies’ chatbots can reproduce their articles verbatim shortly after publication, without providing prominent links back to the original sources.
該訴訟是針對 Microsoft 和 OpenAI 采取的最新法律行動，指控它們?yōu)E用受版權(quán)保護(hù)的內(nèi)容來構(gòu)建為 ChatGPT 等人工智能技術(shù)提供支持的大型語言模型 (LLM)。 在訴狀中，AGC 出版物聲稱，這些公司的聊天機(jī)器人可以在文章發(fā)表后不久逐字復(fù)制其文章，而無需提供返回原始來源的顯著鏈接。

“This lawsuit is not a battle between new technology and old technology. It is not a battle between a thriving industry and an industry in transition. It is most surely not a battle to resolve the phalanx of social, political, moral, and economic issues that GenAI raises,” the complaint reads.
“這場訴訟不是新技術(shù)與舊技術(shù)之間的戰(zhàn)斗。 這不是一個蓬勃發(fā)展的行業(yè)和一個轉(zhuǎn)型中的行業(yè)之間的戰(zhàn)斗。 這肯定不是一場解決 GenAI 提出的社會、政治、道德和經(jīng)濟(jì)問題的戰(zhàn)斗，”訴狀寫道。

“This lawsuit is about how Microsoft and OpenAI are not entitled to use copyrighted newspaper content to build their new trillion-dollar enterprises without paying for that content.”
“這起訴訟是關(guān)于微軟和 OpenAI 如何無權(quán)使用受版權(quán)保護(hù)的報紙內(nèi)容來建立其新的萬億美元企業(yè)而不支付該內(nèi)容的費(fèi)用。”

The plaintiffs also accuse the AI models of “hallucinations,” attributing inaccurate reporting to their publications. They reference OpenAI’s previous admission that it would be “impossible” to train today’s leading AI models without using copyrighted materials.
原告還指責(zé)人工智能模型存在“幻覺”，將不準(zhǔn)確的報告歸咎于他們的出版物。 他們引用了 OpenAI 之前的說法，即如果不使用受版權(quán)保護(hù)的材料，“不可能”訓(xùn)練當(dāng)今領(lǐng)先的人工智能模型。

The allegations echo those made by The New York Times in a separate lawsuit filed last year. The Times claimed Microsoft and OpenAI used almost a century’s worth of copyrighted content to allow their AI to mimic its expressive style without a licensing agreement.
這些指控與《紐約時報》去年在另一起訴訟中提出的指控相呼應(yīng)。 《泰晤士報》聲稱，微軟和 OpenAI 使用了近一個世紀(jì)的受版權(quán)保護(hù)的內(nèi)容，讓他們的人工智能在沒有許可協(xié)議的情況下模仿其表達(dá)風(fēng)格。

In seeking to dismiss key parts of the Times’ lawsuit, Microsoft accused the paper of “doomsday futurology” by suggesting generative AI could threaten independent journalism.
為了駁回《紐約時報》訴訟的關(guān)鍵部分，微軟指責(zé)該報紙是“末日未來學(xué)”，暗示生成人工智能可能威脅獨(dú)立新聞業(yè)。

The AGC publications argue that OpenAI, now valued at $90 billion after becoming a for-profit company, and Microsoft – which has seen hundreds of billions of dollars added to its market value from ChatGPT and Copilot – are profiting from the unauthorised use of copyrighted works.
AGC 出版物認(rèn)為，OpenAI 在成為一家營利性公司后估值現(xiàn)已達(dá)到 900 億美元，而微軟（ChatGPT 和 Copilot 使其市值增加了數(shù)千億美元）正在從未經(jīng)授權(quán)使用版權(quán)作品中獲利。 。

The news publishers are seeking unspecified damages and an order for Microsoft and OpenAI to destroy any GPT and LLM models utilising their copyrighted content.
新聞出版商正在尋求未具體說明的損害賠償，并要求微軟和 OpenAI 銷毀任何利用其版權(quán)內(nèi)容的 GPT 和 LLM 模型。

Earlier this week, OpenAI signed a licensing partnership with The Financial Times to lawfully integrate the newspaper’s journalism. However, the latest lawsuit from AGC highlights the growing tensions between tech companies developing generative AI and content creators concerned about the unchecked use of their works to train profitable AI systems.
本周早些時候，OpenAI 與《金融時報》簽署了許可合作伙伴關(guān)系，以合法整合該報紙的新聞報道。 然而，AGC 的最新訴訟突顯了開發(fā)生成式人工智能的科技公司與內(nèi)容創(chuàng)作者之間日益緊張的關(guān)系，內(nèi)容創(chuàng)作者擔(dān)心他們的作品不受限制地用于訓(xùn)練可盈利的人工智能系統(tǒng)。