News OpenAI Threatens Popular GitHub Project With Lawsuit Over API Use

[Admin]

GPT4Free reverse engineers other sites' connection to OpenAI so anyone can access the GPT4 or GPT3.5 models for free.

OpenAI Threatens Popular GitHub Project With Lawsuit Over API Use : Read more

 

[derekullo]

Quick some one ask chatgpt how to fix this!

 

[Dr3ams]

Silly me...I thought OpenAI was open source.

 

[abufrejoval]

To me this looks like another Youtube Downloader case.

In both cases it seems more convenient and cheaper to send a lawyer dog after a lone developer than fixing an API issue that may require some real work to do properly and might hurt already connected business partners.

Little does it matter that the developer actually isn't doing anything illegal or morally questionable.

Perhaps dumpster diving is another analogy and good fit for the morals around this.

But since OpenAI guys are feeding off human output on the Internet, IMHO they are in a far worse moral position than supermarkets that want to sell you the fresh produce instead.

They are trying to sell you what's not really theirs to begin with, so dive in and let the lawyers know, that they are first in line to get replaced by LLMs!

 

[Vanderlindemedia]

Devs could prompt in a "magic question" and by using logs, you could determine where it's coming from and take proper action(s).

 

[Deleted member 1353997]

A GitHub project called GPT4free(opens in new tab) allows you to get free access to the GPT4 and GPT3.5 models by funneling those queries through sites like You.com(opens in new tab), Quora(opens in new tab) and CoCalc(opens in new tab) and giving you back the answers.

Isn't that less a problem for OpenAI and more for You.com, Quora, CoCalc, etc.? After all, they're the ones that have to pay for premium access, and increased traffic means higher costs for them and more revenue for OpenAI.

Or does the premium plan not care about traffic at all?

 

[nerdvous]

This reminds me stories from the days of dial up, of hackers exploiting corporate numbers to get free unmetered access.

 

[abufrejoval]

This reminds me stories from the days of dial up, of hackers exploiting corporate numbers to get free unmetered access.

I'd say it's a little more like the toll-free whistle where nobody got charged.

Of course electricity ain't for free and them inference tensors are mighty thirsty, but OpenAI gets paid per contract and it's their fault freeriding is so trivial, it only takes a few lines of code.

Sending your dogs on devs that ain't trespassing plain sucks!

 

[pointa2b]

Silly me...I thought OpenAI was open source.

That was certainly its goal pre-Microsoft.

 

[hwertz]

I'm torn on this. On the one hand, the developers arguments are valid, insofar as the script accesses various sites through APIs that perhaps shouldn't be public but are, and it could be up to the sites to ask to be removed from his script. On the other hand, I see OpenAI's point too... the script is letting people set up GPT4 chat on their pages, using other companies paid-up subscriptions to get the results. This is a bit greasy for sure, and (unlike a lot of "gray area" software where it's probably used illegitimately like 99% of the time but it does have a legitimate use), I can't see a legitimate use for this. I imagine the developer could have avoided the issue (at least enough to possibly avoid a C&D) if they had provided a "proof of concept" script without sites pre-loaded into it, and the end user had to add sites to the script for it to do anything. Maybe.

I do point out here, it's not like OpenAI is suing him -- a C&D would just require him to pull down the script. So I don't see OpenAI as going overboard on their response here, and I imagine those paying per request would be perfectly happy for OpenAI to try to get the software pulled so they don't have to go do it themselves.

 

[hwertz]

Silly me...I thought OpenAI was open source.

Actually I did too -- turns out neither GPT-3 or GPT-4 is open source. That said, I don't think that'd matter -- even if it were fully open source, given the high operational costs they still would not want people using their service without going through the "proper channels".

 

[kjfatl]

Silly me...I thought OpenAI was open source.

I can see a lawyer having fun with this one. By using the OpenAI name, they are telling all potential users that they have accepted a 'standard' "Open Source" license. All they have to do is convince a jury that all work done by this company is subject to Open Source rules. Combine it with a fraud case to make sure that damages can be filed against OpenAI.

 

[waltc3]

Copyright problems with AI are just beginning...totally predictable. He better make up his mind whether defending himself in a court in a case he might lose is going to cost him more than simply paying for a license. Lawyers are going to love "AI", I have a feeling...

 

[brandonjclark]

"git clone https://github.com/xtekky/gpt4free"

Ok, cool... It's mine now. Where's my takedown notice?

 

[sam buddy]

We haven't linked to the chatbot because it's at an adult domain name (but has no adult content), but you can find a link to it on the GPT4Free GitHub page.

You mean this link: https://chat.chatbot.sex/chat
There's nothing wrong with it, and the .sex domain is being used for much more than just adult entertainment. I think xtekky believes his project is "hot" (and has a sense of humour).

 

[garrett040]

So much for being "open" they are a microsoft product now basically.

 

[jp7189]

You mean this link: https://chat.chatbot.sex/chat
There's nothing wrong with it, and the .sex domain is being used for much more than just adult entertainment. I think xtekky believes his project is "hot" (and has a sense of humour).

Beware, as of this morning, this site is being redirected to something that appears to be malicious.

 

[JamesJones44]

He's likely going to get cease and desist letters from those sites too. They don't make any revenue without eyeballs.

 

[JamesJones44]

Actually I did too -- turns out neither GPT-3 or GPT-4 is open source. That said, I don't think that'd matter -- even if it were fully open source, given the high operational costs they still would not want people using their service without going through the "proper channels".

None of the data has ever been open sourced as far as I'm aware. Just the platform. You can download the platform and plug in your own trained model, for which they have examples and docs on how to do, but the data from GPT models typically has not been open sourced.

 

[bigdragon]

A company, that gathers training data from everyone without paying for it, is threatening a developer, who created a cross site project for querying AI without paying for it.

There's a lot of "not paying for it" involved in this situation. I'm going to side against OpenAI here since they're profiteering off their stolen data. It's not a developer's fault when they take advantage of an insecure API. Fix your code, profiteering company who can afford it.

 

[sam buddy]

Beware, as of this morning, this site is being redirected to something that appears to be malicious.

Just checked to make sure, no redirection whatsoever, seems OK.
But as this project is evolving and this domain may become obsolete or abandoned, and consecutively used by some other party due to it's popularity, a bit of caution wouldn't hurt.