Skip to main content

Meta Claims Torrenting Pirated Books Isn't Illegal Without Proof of Seeding

3 months ago
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Just because Meta admitted to torrenting a dataset of pirated books for AI training purposes, that doesn't necessarily mean that Meta seeded the file after downloading it, the social media company claimed in a court filing (PDF) this week. Evidence instead shows that Meta "took precautions not to 'seed' any downloaded files," Meta's filing said. Seeding refers to sharing a torrented file after the download completes, and because there's allegedly no proof of such "seeding," Meta insisted that authors cannot prove Meta shared the pirated books with anyone during the torrenting process. [...] Meta ... is hoping to convince the court that torrenting is not in and of itself illegal, but is, rather, a "widely-used protocol to download large files." According to Meta, the decision to download the pirated books dataset from pirate libraries like LibGen and Z-Library was simply a move to access "data from a 'well-known online repository' that was publicly available via torrents." To defend its torrenting, Meta has basically scrubbed the word "pirate" from the characterization of its activity. The company alleges that authors can't claim that Meta gained unauthorized access to their data under CDAFA. Instead, all they can claim is that "Meta allegedly accessed and downloaded datasets that Plaintiffs did not create, containing the text of published books that anyone can read in a public library, from public websites Plaintiffs do not operate or own." While Meta may claim there's no evidence of seeding, there is some testimony that might be compelling to the court. Previously, a Meta executive in charge of project management, Michael Clark, had testified (PDF) that Meta allegedly modified torrenting settings "so that the smallest amount of seeding possible could occur," which seems to support authors' claims that some seeding occurred. And an internal message (PDF) from Meta researcher Frank Zhang appeared to show that Meta allegedly tried to conceal the seeding by not using Facebook servers while downloading the dataset to "avoid" the "risk" of anyone "tracing back the seeder/downloader" from Facebook servers. Once this information came to light, authors asked the court for a chance to depose Meta executives again, alleging that new facts "contradict prior deposition testimony." "Meta has been 'silent so far on claims about sharing data while 'leeching' (downloading) but told the court it plans to fight the seeding claims at summary judgement," notes Ars.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BeauHD

Rivian Reports First Quarter of 'Positive Gross Profit'

3 months ago
Rivian reported its first-ever positive gross profit of $170 million in Q4 2024, driven by cost reductions and increased regulatory credit sales, despite a $4.7 billion net loss for the year. The company said it expects to sell 46,000-51,000 vehicles this year and achieve "modest gross profit." The Verge reports: Rivian reported $170 million in positive gross profits, which includes production and sales but does not factor in other expenses, for the three-month period that ended December 31, 2024. That was based on $1.7 billion in revenues. The company said its net loss for the fourth quarter was $743 million, as compared to $1.5 billion in net losses in the same period in 2023. Rivian earned $4.5 billion in revenue for the full year 2024, based on the delivery of 51,579 vehicles. It record a net loss of $4.7 billion, compared to $5.4 billion in 2023. Rivian cited increased revenue from the sale of regulatory credits to other automakers, which is also a primary revenue driver for Tesla. The company said it saw a $260 million increase in regulatory credit sales in the fourth quarter year over year.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BeauHD