That's not what's being decided, it's the input of copyright content and so far it is leaning strongly towards the AI companies being able to do that and only getting in trouble for pirating the material first.

▲

verdverm 2 days ago | parent [-]

The rationale is part fair use and (more) part the process is transformative.

If the Ai can output enough to violate copyright, that's when an author can make claims. Until it does, it's just speculation that it might one day do that

▲

orionblastar 2 days ago | parent [-]

You mean like using Disney characters without permission in AI art and videos?

▲

atmosx 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

That’s a good one, either way someone will lose (they are both “evil”) and lose big. I wouldn’t bet against AI companies though.

	▲	orionblastar a day ago \| parent [-]
		Free cartoon characters like Tux can be used in videos, images, and video games.

▲

verdverm a day ago | parent | prev [-]

yeah, images are much harder for copyright I expect

the NYT case is another, but that was an older model more prone to that, and text is easier to (eg.) hash and prevent with a post-gen guardrail