zlacker

>>moose4+(OP)
Good. Reading books is legal. If I own a book and feed it to a program I wrote (and I have done exactly that), it is also legal. There is zero reason this should be any different with an AI.

>>bradle+nt
If you charge me to use your program and it spits out unedited, copyrighted material then it should be illegal. I don't know the details of this case, but that's what's going on in the New York Times case. It's not always so cut and dry.

>>thinki+HA
Which is amusing because NYTimes has fought in court a few times in favour of technology progress over copyright. Including recently when they got sued over collected a bunch of freelance writing into a database without consent. https://harvardlawreview.org/blog/2024/04/nyt-v-openai-the-t...

I doubt the exact replica stuff will stand, as technically it was only achievable via advanced prompt engineering (hacking), not simply asking for a replica. So their 2 other arguments boils down to scraping a news database = infringement and LLM output = derivative works.