| > The AI companies seek to train models in order to compete with the authors of the content used to train the models. When I read someone else’s essay I may intend to write essays like that author. When I read someone else’s code I may intend to write code like that author. AI training is no different from any other training. > If a court determines that the AI output you've used is close enough to be considered a derivative work, it's infringement. Do you mean the output of the AI training process (the model), or the output of the AI model? If the former, yes, sure: if a model actually contains within it it copies of data, then sure: it’s a copy of that work. But we should all be very wary of any argument that the ability to create a new work which is identical to a previous work is itself derivative. A painter may be able to copy Gogh, but neither the painter’s brain nor his non-copy paintings (even those in the style of Gogh) are copies of Gogh’s work. |