From the Mintz law firm: Nothing for free - the real costs of ChatGPT

[highplainsdem]

Ran across this checking Google News tonight. It's a very good explanation of just how legally hazardous ChatGPT use can be.

https://www.mintz.com/insights-center/viewpoints/2023-05-12-nothing-free-real-costs-chatgpt

ChatGPT, an AI chatbot developed by OpenAI, recently passed a graduate level quantum computing exam – unsurprisingly, employers are keen to leverage its simple conversational interface and wide domains of knowledge to boost productivity. And ChatGPT isn’t the only such tool in town – others, such as Google Bard and Microsoft Bing (which is also powered by OpenAI) – promise similar results. Many tasks carried out by knowledge workers appear to be in the scope of these AI tools – the email announcing a team reorganization, writing copy for a top secret new product, and even creating complex code. Is this a good idea? It may be, but it is important to understand some of the potential risks, which are wide-ranging, and may result in the loss of intellectual property.

-snip-

The disclosure of business information to an AI tool may render that information ineligible for intellectual property protection, such as trade secrets or patents. These risks are present even if the AI tool does not use the user data for as part of its training.

Trade secrets are protected by virtue of their secrecy. Thus, it is critical to take reasonable steps to protect the trade secrets from disclosure. This generally includes implementing measures such as clearly labeling trade secrets, training employees on confidentiality policies, and limiting access to secret information. Inputting a trade secret into an AI tool is akin to disclosing that trade secret to a third party – generally such disclosures should not be made without a confidentiality agreement in place. Because there may be no confidentiality guarantee with respect to data input into an AI tool, courts may conclude that the use of the AI tool resulted in public disclosure of the information and loss of trade secret protection. Having policies in place prohibiting the disclosure of sensitive business information to AI tools such as ChatGPT may help businesses protect their trade secrets.

-snip-

Employers may open themselves up to risk by using content generated by an AI tool. As mentioned above, these AI tools are trained on a large dataset. Some of this information may be protected already by intellectual property laws, or may contain personally identifiable information. Thus, what is output in response to a prompt may contain portions of potentially trademarked, copyrighted, or otherwise protected material. In addition, some of the output generated for one user may be the same or similar to that generated to another user. Employers will face difficulties in trying to determine whether or not generated content contains any already protected data, meaning they may be liable to the actual IP owner for infringement. As an example, OpenAI was recently sued over Codex, an AI tool akin to ChatGPT but specifically for coding, for alleged copyright violations by outputting code that is identical to sample code in a textbook on computer programming.

-snip-

Much more at the link.

Of course those peddling generative AI, whether for text or art, have just ignored all the many legal issues.

Move fast and break things is still a Silicon Valley motto, one that Sam Altman seems to be following.

[The Unmitigated Gall]

1. Sounds like a good 'ol cluster-F in the making.

[highplainsdem]

2. Yes. And I'd say that's an understatement.

[MiniMe]

3. I've seen ChatGPT popping up lately. I just ignore it.

So tired of them trying to push stuff on us.