Wondering why archive.is is ok to replicate articles beyond paywalls while chatGPT got sued for a few unintentional regurgitations. Should there be a "protect it or lose it" rule for copyright as in trademarks?
I'm not sure if archive.is leverages this (I doubt it has a huge database of paid accounts) but a lot of sites put up full content versions of their sites so search engines can scrape them, so there may be some legal shimmying about taking that search engine version and making it available to regular human eyeballs.