> artist could own the right to let people learn from his music.

They don't, what's happening here is their music is being fed to a computer program in a for-profit venture.

This anthropomorphism of LLMs is concerning. What you're actually implying here is that you believe some computer programs should be awarded the same rights as humans. You can't just skip that like it's some kind of foregone conclusion. You have to defend it. And, it's not easy.

>They don't, what's happening here is their music is being fed to a computer program in a for-profit venture.

I believe that no artist has the right to tell anyone what to do with the art they have published. It does not matter what happens inside the algorithm with that art. Whether NNs (LLMs, by definition are about language) learn like humans or not is totally irrelevant to my point.