zlacker

But the AI used the content to learn how to copy and recreate it. Is ‘re-creation’ a better concept for us?

People already use pirated software for product creation.

Hypothetical:

I know a guy who learned photoshop on a pirated copy of Photoshop. He went on to be a graphic designer. All his earnings are ‘proceeds from crime’

He never used the pirated software to produce content.

>>whycom+(OP)
So can we officially download pirated content to learn stuff now?

>>timeon+j8
Sure, and I feel zero moral qualms about me or anyone else doing it. The vast majority of the shit flows flows from the other direction towards individuals and consumers when it comes to content delivery companies and worse still, software companies. Let's address that before wringing our hands about individual acts of "piracy", even at scale.

I could, right now in just a few minutes, go download a perfectly functional pirated copy of nearly any Adobe program, nearly any Microsoft program and a whole range of books and movies, yet I see zero real financial troubles affecting any of the companies behind these. All the contrary in fact.

>>timeon+j8
How often does a link get posted here of content that is behind a paywall? If you bypass it to read it, didny't you just learn via illegal content? I'm not sure where the "official" comes in, but it's clearly widely accepted.

If you watch a YouTube video to learn something and it's later taken down for using copyrighted images, you learned from illegal content.

>>whycom+9o
"Official" comes in court cases for LLMs with "fair use" result. That is my point. I was not talking about de facto but about de jure. I wasn't hinting to the morality of the action but morality of the two-tier judgement.