Anthropic destroyed millions of print books to build its AI models

Words alone simply fail to adequately convey my disdain, disgust, anger, sense of offense, utter fucking rage of 1,000 suns at this whole farce of a debacle of actions, so-called "jurisprudence", and complete lack of conscience in the simple pursuit of ever-more wealth at the expense of the entirety of society/the physical world.

This reminds me of the book Rainbows End, by Vernor Vinge. In it, a company uses a mulcher to grind down all the books and shelves in a library, then uses scans of the scraps to reassemble the books in digital form for an AR version of the library.

I like him anyway, I'll add that to the list.
- Oh, it's a great book. Or at least, I liked it a lot. The library mulching was opposed by most of the characters.
Didn't Google come up with a system that does exactly that as a fast way to digitize books for their online library

So, people were angry at them for pirating books. Now we find they actually purchased books to scan, and people are angry about that too.

Yeah, I can’t be mad about this. They bought the books, they can do with the physical media whatever they like.
- It sounds like the court ruled it fair use at least in part due to the fact they destroyed the copies after digitizing them too. If this clickbait upsets you, get mad at IP law, not anthropic.
- Seems like bad legislation decisions though. Maybe write in a clause that says if you upload a book to train an AI, then once completed you have to get rid of the book, in a manner than can include donating them to libraries or charities.
  Any way it goes it's a loss. Why waste the paper, glue, ink and such. Would be great if they created a database when they uploaded each book and shared it to the world with direct purchase of the digital copy to the owner of the work. So the other 30 AIs that come along can just download them there, and they already know a set price, so if we see the company doesn't pay at least that much, we know they are stealing the works
The 'pirating' news from a couple of months ago was Meta, specifically. But I'm sure Anthropic did some too.
The issue I've always had wasn't that they didn't own a copy to read/reference. It's that they're effectively creating derivative works from that content, which they haven't licensed for that use.
According to my understanding of copyright law (IANAL but I took a few IP law classes on in college) every author whose work was fed into that beast could have an argument that they share copyright in the derivative work that comes out of it.
- There was actually just a big ruling on a case involving this, here's an article about it. In short: a judge granted summary judgment that establishes that training an AI does not require a license or any other permission from the copyright holder, that training an AI is not a copyright violation and they don't hold any rights over the resulting model.
  I'm assuming this case is why we have this news about Anthropic scanning books coming out right now too.
This is rage bait.
There are many upsetting things about the ai industry but digitising purchased material ain’t it.
If anything this is a boon for information archivism. Unless we ww ourself Into a new stone age this dataset could easily survive some of the books it contains.

American Intellectual property laws have been inadequate and damaging to everyone except Disney since Sonny Bono extended their effects to 70 years past the death of the author. It's important to point out that original copyright length was ~7 years. This is just another example of IP laws needing to catch up to the digital age, and not be an excuse for capitalist dragons to horde all of human knowledge away behind licensing fees.

But unlike Google's version, Claude can accidentally regurgitate the entire text or passages from it, yes?

So it's not really internal and this judge is an imbecile, correct?

(I know that previous "AI" engines have been tricked into returning the original paintings and faces of people that they had ingested, so I assume this is also a possibility for this "AI" too.)

Side note: I used to backtrace Midjourney's "art" to the original non-public domain images they came from.
Weird queries would lead to the same faces created every time, and if you've ever played semantle you could find the original art by doing a hotter/colder process.
Still don't know how they haven't been shut down for copyright infringement.
According to the information provided to the judge, including as claimed by the plaintiffs, no. Their core complaint is only the training.

I'm really sick of these asshole techbros spending millions of dollars on slop.

It's not what I'd prefer they did, but to put this in perspective; I used to buy books on things like a local fair and such, but I talked to the book sellers and they told me that they have to throw so much away every year. So in the grand scheme of thinks, this was a spike in discarded books, but its nothing new. If everyone upset about it will buy a book this week;that will help much more.

The problem with ai isn't this. It's worse actually, but alas

Anthropic vs publishers is kinda like Iran vs Israel