What you describe doesn't seem to have anything to do with using AI, rather it's just a side-effect of using an editor. This same effect occurs using a human editor. Many publications end up with a somewhat homogenized "tone" across multiple writers due to editing and feedback within the same group of individuals.
Maybe ABC will figure out that they should be paying YouTube TV for the service of distributing their content to a large viewer-base. The distribution payments have always seemed backwards to me. The broadcasters are outsourcing distribution and expecting the service provider to pay them. Maybe the next time I need to get my car serviced, I'll see which garage will pay me the most.
The issue with any of these automated systems is that it is impossible to know if the poster has permission to post the content. It may be a copyright violation for one user, but not another. We've already seen the obvious cases, where an automated system blocked the content owner from posting the content, but what if I have an agreement with a copyright holder that allows just me to post certain content? How would any automated system know that I have a contract in my desk drawer or an email in my in-box with permission to share copyrighted information?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Doug Wheeler.
I don't think this has anything to do with AI
What you describe doesn't seem to have anything to do with using AI, rather it's just a side-effect of using an editor. This same effect occurs using a human editor. Many publications end up with a somewhat homogenized "tone" across multiple writers due to editing and feedback within the same group of individuals.
Payments are backward
Maybe ABC will figure out that they should be paying YouTube TV for the service of distributing their content to a large viewer-base. The distribution payments have always seemed backwards to me. The broadcasters are outsourcing distribution and expecting the service provider to pay them. Maybe the next time I need to get my car serviced, I'll see which garage will pay me the most.
ChatGPT doesn't store training data
It is impossible for ChatGPT to quote the actual legal complaint - it doesn't store any training data.
How would algorithm know if permission was obtained?
The issue with any of these automated systems is that it is impossible to know if the poster has permission to post the content. It may be a copyright violation for one user, but not another. We've already seen the obvious cases, where an automated system blocked the content owner from posting the content, but what if I have an agreement with a copyright holder that allows just me to post certain content? How would any automated system know that I have a contract in my desk drawer or an email in my in-box with permission to share copyrighted information?