[015a]

What do you actually believe, with that statement? Do you believe Libraries are operating illegally? That they aren't paying rightsholders?

Also: GPT is not a legal entity in the united states. Humans have different rights than computer software. You are legally allowed to borrow books from the library. You are legally allowed to recite the content you read. You're not allowed to sell verbatim recitation of what you read. This is, obvious, I think? But its exactly what LLMs are doing right now.

[stale2002]

> Humans have different rights than computer software

Fortunately, the computer isn't the one being sued.

Instead it is the humans who use the computer. And those humans maintain their existing rights, even if they use a computer.

[015a]

Maybe (though there exist plenty of examples to the contrary). However, the NYT isn't suing you, ChatGPT user; they're suing OpenAI.

[stale2002]

Gotcha.

OpenAI is run by humans as well though.

So the same argument applies.

Those humans have fair use rights as well.