I just wonder if they’ll get out of it because LLMs do reword the information instead of spitting it back out verbatim. It’s the same reason I think the image generators are safe from copyright law - it’s just different enough that they could plausibly convince a judge with a fair use argument.

What bothers me even more is all the text they had to scrape to create ChatGPT… That seems like a novel problem for the legal system because you know there’s no way they paid for all of it.

I’m not 100% sure where I stand but, for arguments sake; Are you sure about that? it sure is transformative!

It’s wishful thinking on your part. Every AI model in existence, from computer vision to the photo adjustments in your phone camera was trained this way.

The only reason there’s a stink now is that certain lobbies suddenly lose their job as opposed to blue collar workers.

But there’s more than a decade of precedent now to fall back on and not one legal case to show that it’s not fair use.

So would you kindly cite the case decisions that back up your assertion? Or are you just hallucinating like an LLM because you want a certain outcome to be true? Geez, I wonder where the technology learned that.