[true_religion]

The ability to ask people what is contained within a book isn't obviously copyright infringement.

Merely summarizing info and attributing it to the source is the basic element of learning, for both machines and human beings.

These suits are necessary becsuse it's not clear where the line is, and if ChatGPTs functions actually cross it.

What is clear is that OpenAI is doing its best to avoid infringing anyone's copyright even if it is trivial for them to do so. They have the training data so they can simply output it word for word bypass the LLM. They don't do that and further restrain their LLM from making too long recitations.

If you can trick / manipulate the LLM into giving you too much then I say that infringement is on you.

[throwaway290]

> The ability to ask people what is contained within a book isn't obviously copyright infringement.

The ability to ask a commercial product is. In fact, feeding the book to that commercial product is already infringement.

ClosedAI is doing squat. The very least they could do is ask authors for permission, and of course if they really cared they would have LLM infer attribution and revenue share with the original creators.