[getmeinrn]

Yes, I acknowledged that piracy is illegal in my previous post. That's not what the lawsuit is about, according to The Verge:

>In the OpenAI suit, the trio offers exhibits showing that when prompted, ChatGPT will summarize their books, infringing on their copyrights.

[binarymax]

That serves as evidence that the model has seen the material, and the only way the model could have seen the material is if it was pirated.

[getmeinrn]

You're missing the bigger picture[1]:

  Numerous questions of law or fact common to each Class arise from Defendants’ conduct:
    whether ChatGPT itself is an infringing derivative work based on Plaintiffs’ copyrighted books;
    whether the text outputs of ChatGPT are infringing derivative works based on Plaintiffs’ copyrighted books;

It's not a simple case of "you used our copyrighted materials", it's "you're infringing on our copyright by producing works derived from materials that you used."

1. https://llmlitigation.com/pdf/03223/tremblay-openai-complain...

[8note]

That assumption is the reason why it's a shady argument for infringement. There's other ways to get a summary of a book than reading it, like asking a friend who's read it to give a summary