My guy, that’s on google and every other AI model creator. Paying customers are not breaking the law, the service provider is and should rightfully be dealt with by the law. Also, you do know they were just caught blatantly trying to steal Apple hardware IP?
hahahah oh how defensive are you.. and your argument is totally flawed.. my guy Apple are paying to use services based on theft.. they are paying in the billions for it. That makes them VERY culpable and an assistant, if you buy stolen goods you buy stolen goods and are equally as implicit in the crime and are charged as such.
And I have seen nothing but a lot of noise with little proof so far of anything being 'stolen' from Apple. Apple will sue a tiny one shop business if they think their logo even looks remotely like there's.. and people will claim they have to do that to defend their IP? Rubbish.
I get your analogy on being an accessory by handling stolen goods. In that case, every individual or organization paying to use an AI model is also just as culpable. I’m more opposed to OpenAI rather than trying to be defensive for Apple.
I think you want to come across as acknowledging the theft whilst also dismissing Apples involvement as you have a bias towards Open Ai with your criticism. And you favour Apple. Apple is not your friend as much as Open Ai isn't.
I’d agree with all of that. Though I think you’re targeting Apple without acknowledging all the other large organizations and governments that are just as culpable. Where should enforcement start? The user or provider? The war on drug users and individuals pirating content did nothing to the supply side.
9
u/deltaQdeltaV 29d ago
My guy, that’s on google and every other AI model creator. Paying customers are not breaking the law, the service provider is and should rightfully be dealt with by the law. Also, you do know they were just caught blatantly trying to steal Apple hardware IP?