GenAI tools ‘could not exist’ if firms are made to pay copyright::undefined

  • @Eccitaze
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 months ago

    Hell, that article is also all about Google Books, which is an entirely different beast from generative AI. One of the key points from the circuit judge was that Google Books’ use of copyrighted material “…[maintains] respectful consideration for the rights of authors and other creative individuals, and without adversely impacting the rights of copyright holders.” The appeals court, in upholding the ruling that Google Books’ use of copyrighted content is fair use, ruled “the revelations do not provide a significant market substitute for the protected aspects of the originals.”

    If you think that gen AI doesn’t provide a significant market substitute for the artwork created by the artists and authors used to train these models, or that it doesn’t adversely impact their rights, then you’re utterly delusional.