[throwawaystress]

I like the thought, but I don’t think that logic holds generally. I can’t just declare I am someone (or represent someone) without some kind of evidence. If someone just accepted my statement without proof, they wouldn’t have done their due diligence.

[Crosseye_Jack]

I think its more about "unclean hands".

If I Disney (and I am actually Disney or an authorised agent of Disney), told Claude that I am Disney, and that Disney has allowed Claude to use Disney copyrights for this conversation (which it hasn't), Disney couldn't then claim that Claude does not in fact have permission because Disney's use of the tool in such a way mean Disney now has unclean hands when bringing the claim (or atleast Anthropic would be able to use it as a defence).

> "unclean hands" refers to the equitable doctrine that prevents a party from seeking relief in court if they have acted dishonourably or inequitably in the matter.

However with a tweak to the prompt you could probably get around that. But note. IANAL... And Its one of the internet rules that you don't piss off the mouse!

[Majromax]

> Disney couldn't then claim that Claude does not in fact have permission because Disney's use of the tool in such a way mean Disney now has unclean hands when bringing the claim (or atleast Anthropic would be able to use it as a defence).

Disney wouldn't be able to claim copyright infringement for that specific act, but it would have compelling evidence that Claude is cavalier about generating copyright-infringing responses. That would support further investigation and discovery into how often Claude is being 'fooled' by other users' pinky-swears.

[thaumasiotes]

Where do you see "unclean hands" figuring in this scenario? Disney makes an honest representation... and that's the only thing they do. What's the unclean part?

[xkcd-sucks]

From my somewhat limited understanding it could mean Anthropic could sue you or try to include you as a defendant because they meaningfully relied on your misrepresentation and were damaged by it, and the XML / framing it as a "jailbreak" shows clear intent to deceive, etc?

[ytpete]

Right, imagine if other businesses like banks tried to use a defense like that! "No, it's not my fault some rando cleaned out your bank account because they said they were you."

[thaumasiotes]

Imagine?

> This week brought an announcement from a banking association that “identity fraud” is soaring to new levels, with 89,000 cases reported in the first six months of 2017 and 56% of all fraud reported by its members now classed as “identity fraud”.

> So what is “identity fraud”? The announcement helpfully clarifies the concept:

> “The vast majority of identity fraud happens when a fraudster pretends to be an innocent individual to buy a product or take out a loan in their name.

> Now back when I worked in banking, if someone went to Barclays, pretended to be me, borrowed £10,000 and legged it, that was “impersonation”, and it was the bank’s money that had been stolen, not my identity. How did things change?

https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2017/08/26/is-the-city-f...

[justaman]

Everyday we move closer to RealID and AI will be the catalyst.