New Court records in a Copyright issue of AI against Meta add confidence in previous reports that the company “banned” discussions with books on licensing agreements to supply some of its generating models with training data.
Registrations are related to the Kadrey v. Meta platforms – one of the many cases such as the US judicial system that is the companies of the authors and other intellectual property holders. For the most part, the defendants in these cases – the companies of he – have claimed that the training on copyright protected content is “fair use”. Plaintiffs – Copyright holders – have not been voiced.
The new registrations presented to the Court on Friday, which include partial transcripts of the Meta employee deposits taken by lawyers for plaintiffs in the case, suggest that some meta staff feel negotiating the data licenses for training for Books may not be escalating.
According to a transcript, the Ch matterry, who directs the partnership initiatives he flaws, said that the flaws for various publishers were received with “very slow receipt of engagement and interest”.
“I don’t remember the whole list, but I remember we had made a long list of clearing the internet of senior publishers, etc.,” said Chousryry, according to the transcript, “and we did not get contacts and feedback from – by many Our cold call approaches to prove to create contacts. “
Ch matterry added, “There were some, like this, you know, engage, but not too much.”
According to court transcriptions, Meta stopped several attempts to license books related to him in early April 2023 after meeting “time” and other logistical obstacles. Chouryry said that some publishers, in particular the publishers of the fabric books, turned out to have no rights to the content Meta was considering licensing, for a transcript.
“I would like to point out that – in the category of fabrications, we quickly learned from the business development team that most publishers we were talking to, they themselves represented that they did not, in fact, For us, ”Chouryry said. “And so it will take a lot of time to engage with all their authors.”
Chouryry noted during his deposit that Meta had at least one other case stopped licensing efforts regarding the development of it, according to a transcript.
“I am aware of such licensing efforts, for example, we tried to license the 3D world from various engine manufacturers and games for our research team,” Choushury said. “And in the same way that I am describing here about the data of fabrications and textbooks, we received very little commitment to having a conversation (…) We decided – in that case, we decided to build our solution.”
Plaintiff Advisor, who include the best-selling authors Sarah Silverman and Ta-Nahisi Coates, have changed their appeal several times since the case was raised in the US District Court for the Northern County of California, San Francisco Division in 2023. The last changed by the plaintiff’s lawyer claims that Meta, among other offenses, referred several books pirated with copyright protected books available for a license to determine if it made sense to pursue a licensing agreement with a publisher .
The complaint also accuses Meta that the use of “shade libraries” containing pirate ebooks to train some of the company’s models, including its popular Llama series of “open” models. According to the complaint, Meta may have provided some of the libraries through the stream. The stream, a way of distributing files across the network, requires that the torrents simultaneously “seed” or upload, the files they are trying to get – for which the plaintiffs claimed to be a form of copyright violation.
