It's actually the opposite of what you're saying. I can 100% legally do all the things that they're suing OpenAI for. Their whole argument is that the rules should be different when a machine does it than a human.

▲

JoshTriplett 7 months ago | parent | next [-]

Only because it would be unconscionable to apply copyright to actual human brains, so we don't. But, for instance, you absolutely can commit copyright violation by reading something and then writing something very similar, which is one reason why reverse engineering commonly uses clean-room techniques. AI training is in no way a clean room.

▲

nhinck3 7 months ago | parent | prev [-]

You literally can't

▲

p_l 7 months ago | parent [-]

You literally can.

Your ability to regurgitate remembered article that is copyrighted does not make your brain a derivative work because removing that specific article from the training set is below noise floor of impact.

However reproducing the copyrighted material based on that is a violation because the created reproduction does critically depend on that copyrighted material.

(Gross simplification) Similar to how you can watch & read a lot of Star Wars and then even ape Ralph McQuarrie style in your own drawings but unless the result is unmistakenly related to Star Wars there's no copyright infringement - but there is if someone looks at the result and goes "that's Star Wars, isn't it?"

▲

nhinck3 7 months ago | parent [-]

Can you regurgitate billions of pieces of information to hundreds of thousands of other people in a way that competes with the source of that information?

	▲	CuriouslyC 7 months ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If there was only one source for a piece of news ever, you might be able to make that argument in good faith, but when there are 20 outlets with competing versions of the same story it doesn't hold.
	▲	YetAnotherNick 7 months ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It is called internet. It could regurgitate billions of pieces of information to billions of people every day.