Journalist Alarmed When He’s Fired, But Company Keeps Posting AI Slop Under His Name
https://www.yahoo.com/news/world/articles/journalist-alarmed-fired-company-keeps-140100529.html
https://www.yahoo.com/news/world/articles/journalist-alarmed-fired-company-keeps-140100529.html
33 Comments
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 94 pts · 66d
Seems like this should be illegal somehow... Though I'm not sure what it would actually fall under.
Possibly libel? If he found any of the slop to be low quality or objectionable, he could say it's disparaging against him (and knowingly false) for the company to claim that he wrote it.
PiraHxCx@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 79 pts · 66d
fraud, defamation, appropriation of name or likeness, fraudulent misrepresentation...
LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 36 pts · 66d
Yeah I can't just write a book put Brandon Sanderson's name on the front and collect the proceeds.
Redjard@reddthat.com · 5 pts · 66d
But what if ai writes a book and puts Brandon Sanderson's name on it because it was trained on his books and was told to write a book that looks like one of his, because you fired him, and then you don't proof-read the result and publish it with Brandon Sanderson's name on it?
Speaking hypothetically asking for a friend.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 66d
I mean Amazon is a mecca of self publishing
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 23 pts · 66d
Maybe Fraud?!
T156@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 65d
It would be fraud when they were presenting it to other people, but I'd be curious if it would apply to him, since he's not the one being defrauded.
Is impersonation by misattribution actionable in a court of law?
ZDL@lazysoci.al · 22 pts · 66d
Assuming here the USA (because it's mostly the USA that does this kind of rabid shit): most states have "right of publicity" laws in which individual have exclusive right to control the commercial use of their name, likeness, or other recognizable aspects of their persona. Commercial use of someone's such identity and/or persona can be very, very severe depending on which state the offending action was taken in.
More federally we have the Lanham act that explicitly prohibits the use of a person's name/identity in commerce in a way that is likely to cause confusion about affiliation, sponsorship, or endorsement. This doesn't even require a trademark registration, though it is easier to get your Lanham rights if you have one.
Finally there's the hallucination angle which can lead to defamation suits. The LLM will inevitably hallucinate, and if the hallucination is of the variety that could expose the named person to ridicule, hatred, etc. that is a straightforward defamation suit that could result in a whole lot of monetary loss to the publisher.
And here's the fun part. These are not exclusive. A publisher could face statutory damages for right of publicity violation, stripping of profits for the Lanham violations, and compensatory and punitive damages for defamation by hallucination.
Note: IANAL, obviously, but I do research things for a living. Consult with an attorney, not me, for actual court cases.
logi@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 66d
Bad assumption, it turns out, and the article tells us which EU regulation helped him.
(It's at the bottom, since we're lazy)
ZDL@lazysoci.al · -1 pts · 66d
Wait, a EUROPEAN company has gone slop-happy and anti-human evil?
Fuck.
The American rot is spreading quickly, isn't it?
Simon_Shitewood@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 66d
This may surprise you but capitalism thoroughly predates the US.
ZDL@lazysoci.al · 2 pts · 65d
Not all capitalism is quite as out of control and flat-out evil as American capitalism. Some countries still try, at least, to keep their capitalists under control (with varying degrees of success, natch). The USA seems to think it exists for the capitalists.
Simon_Shitewood@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 65d
Europe had half a dozen east India companies fighting over superexploitation of the east, with armies bigger than the national armies. It's just regular capitalism.
ZDL@lazysoci.al · 0 pts · 64d
In today's lesson you learn about verb tenses? 'Cause you need it.
LodeMike@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 64d
All LLMs do is hallucinate...
RonnyZittledong@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 66d
I am no lawyer but it seems like a slam dunk lawsuit, especially since they are an ex-employee. If it was just some other person or journalist's name being used they could at least make the claim that they made the name up and it's just a coincidence and were just trying producing your garden variety AI slop that so many other news outlets are.
EtherTide@aussie.zone · 14 pts · 66d
Trademark law seems like it'd be the easiest. Pretty sure that a journalist's byline would count as a brand, and posting AI-slop under that brand without permission seems like it would tarnish that brand's reputation.
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 10 pts · 66d
It could work, but only if he registered his name as a trademark. Trademark protection isn't automatic -- it's only enforceable if you've registered the trademark before the alleged infringement happened.
Zephyr@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 66d
Depends on the contract he chose to sign when taking up employment with them.
CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 66d
Most employment contracts are illegal. They throw in bad terms just in the hope an employee won't fight.
Zephyr@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 66d
Things should clear up soon once sufficient legal advice becomes trivially cheap.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 66d
Hold on, let me get my AI lawyer.
Zephyr@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 66d
Litigation is probably still going to need a person but working though jargon on contracts you wouldn't normally think to call a lawyer for to begin with will become trivial.
CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 66d
They don't go to litigation because they know its illegal. Most common example are non-compete clauses. No one can stop you from gainful employment wherever the fuck you please. The courts have squashed this B.S. thoroughly, except on extremely narrow circumstances, and no one wants the added costs. Litogate, sure lose and pay both costs and still lose.
quick_snail@feddit.nl · 28 pts · 66d
Felt like a Futurism headline, but on yahoo domain.
The image credits futurism.
What happened here?
baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de · 15 pts · 66d
yahoo and some other sites like msn republish articles from other sites for free, hopefully with a valid license.
cecilkorik@lemmy.ca · 12 pts · 66d
Hopefully. If Yahoo were also republishing other sites articles without permission, that would be rather ironic, given how similar that feels to the topic in question.
perfectly_boiled_pizza@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 66d
Here's the proper link: https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/fired-journalist-ai-posts-in-his-name
Fmstrat@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 66d
Mmmhmmm. Company lessons learned, right?
Nope.
Cruxifux@feddit.nl · 8 pts · 66d
I thought this was the onion for sure with that title.
BussyGyatt@feddit.org · 6 pts · 65d
FTFY
lechekaflan@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 64d
Scumfucks. What I hate about these sites having to resort to all sorts of trickery to keep being relevant and having more traffic -- and ad revenue -- coming in. Won't be surprised either some of these sites get paid by other corporations and/or governments to push specific narratives and propaganda.