[marcuskane2]

I think you wrote this to be snarky, but it's just literally true.

You are allowed to read books from the library and remember what they say, and use that information to inform your own future writing or speaking or actions.

You are allowed to listen to copyrighted music and learn from it. You can even play songs from The Beatles or Metallica in your garage as training.

You absolutely do have the right to "train your brain" on copyrighted material. Copyright restricts who is allowed to publish the work, not who is allowed to consume it.

[lern_too_spel]

> You are allowed to read books from the library

You aren't allowed to download a torrent of pirated books as these companies have done and freely distribute it to multiple brains to train on.

If the brains can then write down the original works from memory, you aren't allowed to make copies of these brains and freely distribute them either.

[pull_my_finger]

Ok but you're not "remembering what they say", you're creating a "derivative work" by literally just tokenizing/vectorizing (I'm not a data scientist or AI expert) the words as they appear exactly. AI doesn't innovate based on works it consumes, and it doesn't understand "concepts" picked up from it. It simply adds the possibility of regurgitating (read plagiarizing) verbatim or part or whole to a list of other possibilities. This is on top of the fact that these parasites didn't even ask to use or purchase the works to begin with, they stole (pirated) them.

[archontes]

It's a stretch to call training an AI creating a 'derivative work' by the legal definition.

You could count the words in a book and publish the word count, and while the information is based on the contents of the book, that would fall incredibly short of being a derivative work.

I suspect they committed whatever copyright violation is committed when they downloaded the copyrighted works. Training an AI on them is simply not related to the protections that copyright offers.