“For good measure, Katie investigated whether Bing was consistent in how it represented its relationship to copyright, trademark, and originality. The results were decidedly mixed.”
Our reading:
Bing was inconsistent in how it described copyright, trademark, and the originality of its outputs.
Assessment: Unresolved
What happened
Was it true for the period described?
Outcome: Unresolved
We checked, and the evidence so far doesn’t settle it.
Judged on a plain reading. They named no measure, so we used the reading a typical informed reader would take. It is spelled out under “How we judged it”.
Evidence up to . Checked .
Why
The claim says that across chats Katie Conrad ran in early January 2024, Bing gave inconsistent answers about copyright, trademark, originality and how its images could be used. The evidence packet contains no evidence items. The search found the authors' own post and a later post by Conrad that describes varied Bing replies. Both come from the speaker's side, so under the contract neither counts as independent evidence. Two other sources were set aside: one covers a different incident from October 2023, and the other gives only general background on copyrighted outputs. The packet records no independent source for the chat replies the authors compared. With no independent record either way, the claim can be neither supported nor contradicted.
Caveats
- The packet has no independent transcript or report of the Bing replies that were compared.
- The packet does not give the dates of the individual chat exchanges.
- The packet notes that chat answers vary between sessions and that the January 2024 replies cannot be reproduced now.
Evidence (0 items)
Nothing we found settles this yet.
How we judged it
- Kind of claim
- Observation
- Deadline
- None given. We don’t add one.
Where we had to interpret
- Plain reading: across several Bing chats in early January 2024, Bing gave conflicting statements about whether its images were original and whether, or how, users could use them (personal, website, commercial).
- The target period is early January 2024, up to the post date.
Right if: Independent records of two or more Bing chat replies from that period that conflict on originality or usage rights for generated images.
Wrong if: Independent records showing Bing gave consistent answers on originality and usage rights in the exchanges described.
We wrote this test after the outcome was known.
What would settle it
Independent transcripts, archives or news reports from about January 1–10, 2024 that record two or more Bing chat replies about whether generated images were original or could be used, so the replies can be compared side by side.
We found 10 claims in this post. See them all.
Full record
Source and dates
Marcus on AI, DALL-E’s New Guardrails: Fast, Furious, and Far from Airtight, paragraph 24.
- Said
- We read the source
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence up to
- Checked
We read this wording on 2026-10-29. The post may have been edited after 2024-01-10.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the posts we read.
: Marcus on AI, DALL-E’s New Guardrails: Fast, Furious, and Far from Airtight
For good measure, Katie investigated whether Bing was consistent in how it represented its relationship to copyright, trademark, and originality. The results were decidedly mixed.
- Where
- paragraph 24
- Published
- 2024-01-10
- We read it
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Versions
- Current: Unresolved. Evidence up to 2026-10-28.
What happened to this record
PublishedBy us
Published after both AI reviews and the final check passed.
Held backBy us
The final check failed: the write-up said more than the evidence showed.