[Workaccount2]

>At least, that's where this is all going.

Not really, because that would still be a loss for artists. Where they are trying to steer the ship is to "training on IP is copyright violation".

Artists are looking to stop AI from taking their jobs. An AI generator with an IP filter on it's output will still very much be a threat to their work.

[archontes]

I agree that interested parties are trying to steer the ship there. I just don't see the legal arguments that will get them there.

Given the fact that images are transmitted to a person in a manner that doesn't violate copyright (and even if they are, the transmitter, not receiver is guilty of infringement), training an AI is not something that copyright law limits.

The AI weights that result are about the farthest thing from a derivative work, as the weights as a separate object, don't seem to contain the slightest remnant of the original work.