[mrsilencedogood]

"This is the best argument on the page imo, and even that is highly debated. I agree with "AI is performing copyright infringement" and see constant "AI ignores my robots.txt". I also grew up being told that ANYTHING on the internet was for the public, and copyright never stopped me from saving images or pirating movies."

I think the main problem for me is that these companies benefit from copyright - by beating anyone they can reach with the DMCA stick - and are now also showing they don't actually care about it at all and when they do it, it's ok.

Go ahead, AI companies. End copyright law. Do it. Start lobbying now.

(They won't, they'll just continue to eat their cake and have it too).

[ACCount37]

Lawyers of all the most beloved companies - Disney, New York Times, book publishers, music publishers and more - are now engaged in court battles, trying to sue all kinds of AI companies for "copyright infringement".

So far, case law is shaping up towards "nope, AI training is fair use". As it well should.

[_DeadFred_]

If your product wouldn't exist without inputting someone else's product, it is derivative of that someone else's product. This isn't a human learning. This is a corporate, for profit product, it is derivative, and violates copyright.

[ACCount37]

That's not the standard we hold "human generated" media to. Not even "mockbusters" are illegal under copyright law. Nothing is new and everything is a remix. And I see no reason to make an exception for AI.

Copyright law is a disgrace, and copyright should be cut down massively - not made into an even more far-reaching anti-freedom abomination than it already is.

[jacquesm]

> Nothing is new and everything is a remix.

This is absolutely not true.

[dpoloncsak]

Yeah, it's a fair point. We have seen a clear abuse of our copyright system.