A while back, ChatGPT was served with a court order to indefinitely retain all user prompts and responses for an ongoing court case relating to copyright infringement. Two individuals have filed interventions against that Judge, warning that this may de-facto create a mass surveillance program where deleted chats can be accessed by law enforcement officials.
The judge in question has rejected these arguments, effectively ignoring the consequences of retaining deleted and anonymous user prompts. These responses will be kept by ChatGPT until the court case resolves itself.
Please do not use any ChatGPT service if you are planning to discuss sensitive information. In fact, don’t use ANY cloud-based service if you want to keep your deleted responses…well…deleted.
All this is a consequence of the legal system. The e-discovery process requires all parties to retain evidence so the other side can view and use it.
Now the judge has refused to exclude deleted and anonymized chats, as well as quite literally all messages even if it includes private information. No idea why she can’t have some form of limitation on this
I wonder how/if this impacts duck.ai? Sounds like it falls under the “legal compliance” framework below.
In addition, we have agreements in place with all model providers that further limit how they can use data from these anonymous chats, including the requirement that they delete all information received once it is no longer necessary to provide responses (at most within 30 days with limited exceptions for safety and legal compliance).