| > > ...who does not clearly have the rights > This claim is baseless... it all boils to question how much of the salt makes a soup a salty one. No it doesn't. The very existence of the question means it is not clear. > - if I put 10.000 words into a prompt and got 500 words out of it, is the author LLM, or me? Neither. The author is some unknown number of people whose words were scraped. > - if I got 50 lines, and modified each single one, is the author LLM, or me? Neither. The author is some unknown number of people whose words were scraped, combined possibly with you. You need all authors to agree on the rights. You would have to not just modify them, but modify them substantially to either change their meaning or criticise them, or do something because just flip a random number of bits in order to get into the running, and a judge might still disagree with you. > I'm confident I could prove my case against the court I'm not even sure you understand the stakes, because not just the authors have claim but also the persons (e.g. z.ai in your case) who assembled the model, and you just blew past both of those people like they were nothing. You're not even in third-place for rights on this work, and you don't even seem to realise that. |