Entering of Logos Ressources into ChatGPT legal?
Hi,
Is it legal to feed ChatGPT parts of my Logos commentaries in a chat in order to draw and process their information for me? I'd imagine that it could be immensely helpful to have ChatGPT read five commentaries on a given chapter and have it pre-filter e.g. applications, explanations for a given verse or differences in opinion of commentators. One could even make it write a synthesized version of said commentaries. But does that constitute a legal issue in terms of copyright etc. or is there nothing to mind?
Is there an official Logos answer to this?
Thanks 
Comments
Is it legal to feed ChatGPT parts of my Logos commentaries in a chat
I'm no lawyer, but common sense says no way would it be legal without getting explicit permission from the publisher. And if you do get that permission, you would not need Logos, they would give you an electronic file that could be used for that purpose a lot more easily than Logos. But I seriously doubt that any publisher would do that unless you had some serious $$$$ cash to offer.
Now there are lots of public domain commentaries ... tons of them. Copyright long expired or never existed in the first place, those would be fair game [:)]
*Nothing in this post constitutes legal advice, it is 100% just the posters opinion
To the best of my knowledge, it is fair use to use copyrighted materials for training AI. See AI and Copyright Law: What We Know | Built In But this is certainly on the fringes of being about Logos software and resources as the Logos format is scarcely AI friendly.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
If one owned the A.I. part and owned Logos resources.... and wanted to put their Logos resources into their A.I. ... I don't see a problem.
But if one doesn't own both parts.... then the question of ethics would come up in my mind. Is it ethical?
And as has been mentioned, there is no excuse for direct study.
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
It seems to me like you might be on firmer footing if you run it locally, and just export Logos files. https://crfm.stanford.edu/2023/03/13/alpaca.html
Using Logos as a pastor, seminary professor, and Tyndale author
"So Joshua burned Ai and made it a heap forever, a desolation until this day." Joshua 8:28 LSB
Dare to be a Joshua.
(H/T: Church Curmudgeon)
AI is just a tool. Like any tool, it can be used for good ... or for evil.
Those with big plans to use it for evil probably aren't too interested in Bible study. [H]
But Christians need to always view it as a tool, lest it become an idol to them.
AI is just a tool. Like any tool, it can be used for good ... or for evil.
The problem is that AI is not a tool; AI is like a worker that operates a tool. AI is not like a table saw; it's like a person who owns a table saw. You give them a board to cut (i.e., ask a question), and get back the result they choose to give. You might ask for a 5-inch by 9-inch rectangle and get back a 12-inch square.
Here's an answer of a slightly different kind: Instead of trying the lazy man's road, investing time and energy into applying one's mind to read and consider and process information while studying Scripture may be a far better proposition providing for more lasting results.
Wolfgang Schneider
(BibelCenter)
Yannik's question is a good one; certainly folks will want to be advised.
But it's also an interesting one. I've often wondered at commentary writer's approaches (since they're sort of re-inventing the wheel, yet again). Certainly, they must be aware of the problem. I've read lexicons are a simpler equation ... they tend to re-use, and alter as necessary. Carry the tradition.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.