OpenAI Accidentally Deletes ChatGPT Training Data Amid Publisher Copyright Claims, Sparking Concerns Over Evidence Retention In Legal Cases
OpenAI has been in a bit of controversy with the press, as The New York Times and the Daily News have sued the AI giant and its investors, claiming that ChatGPT was trained using their copyrighted content. The lawyers' research data, that went into training AI models, was deleted by OpenAI engineers, supposedly by accident. The move potentially deleted the evidence The New York Times lawyers acquired against OpenAI.
OpenAI claims it accidentally deleted the ChatGPT training data after publishers filed for copyright violations
OpenAI is advancing rapidly in developing AI for businesses but faces obstacles to achieving a major breakthrough, while Apple's cautious approach is keeping Apple Intelligence steady. Tech giants are not shy of using copyrighted material to train different AI models with different sets of data. We have previously covered how AI companies not only used textual data but also YouTube videos, including MKBHD videos, to train their AI models.
Related Story AI Servers Can Reach “Rack Density” Of 1000+ KW Likely With NVIDIA’s Next-Gen “Rubin Ultra” Architecture
OpenAI previously agreed to open its AI platform for The New York Times and Daily News in an attempt for them to search for their own copyrighted material in the AI training sets. The publishers' experts spent a hefty amount of time curating the data that OpenAI had used to train ChatGPT since early November. While evidence could have supported the publishers' claims, OpenAI accidentally erased relevant data sets that went into training ChatGPT.
Kyle Wiggers from TechCrunch states:
To put it simply, OpenAI is accused of deleting the evidence or research conducted by the experts from The New York Times. You can check out the letter published online for more details. OpenAI was able to retrieve the deleted data but in a format that can not be used legally, making it unsuitable in the case of copyrighted material. It remains to be seen how the publishers will respond to the mishap and if any
Read more on wccftech.com
