zlacker

>>ssgodd+(OP)
You do copyright for content that you invented and which didn't exist before.

But NYT content is reporting on events truthfully to the public without any fiction or lies.

Since there can be only one truth it should not matter whether NYT or Washington Post or ChatGPT is spinning it out.

Unless NYT is claiming they don't report truth and publishes fiction.

That is of concern since, NYT claims to reporth news truthfully.

So is NYT scamming Americans hundreds of millions of dollars by charging for subscription fees by making a false promise on things that they report?

This should be the bigger question here.

>>rand12+P7
AFAIK facts like happenings in the world are not copyrightable. So I guess the nyt is arguing it's copying their prose and way of writing about them?

>>artnin+r8
Yes. Journalism is a job. People do the work of turning these happenings into words, and are paid for it. That's what's stolen here. The value created through doing that work.

If it didn't have value, Microsoft would lose nothing by no longer ingesting it.

>>mrkeen+Q9
> People do the work of turning these happenings into words, and are paid for it. That's what's stolen here.

Stolen from whom? Journalists who got reported got paid. The owner is a billionaire. I don't understand your logic.

Does NYT pays money to the people/countries etc it uses to as subject to create content(NEWS)? Isn't that stealing then?

Also their website TOS didn't prohibit LLMs from using their data.

>>rand12+ya
> Stolen from whom? The owner is a billionaire.

> ...owner...

> Does NYT pays money to the people/countries etc it uses to as subject to create content(NEWS)? Isn't that stealing then?

No, that's why in my reply to "facts like happenings in the world are not copyrightable" I emphasised do the work. Journalism is a job. Happenings do not just fall onto the page.

> Also their website TOS didn't prohibit LLMs from using their data.

This is just lazy. We have rule of law. Individuals don't need to write "don't break law X" to be protected by them. And nytimes does in fact have copyright symbols on its pages - not that it needs them.