3 ms·

I agree with your point, but I think the tendency to accidentally produce substantial quotations of some unknown fidelity of some copyrighted material is defini

I agree with your point, but I think the tendency to accidentally produce substantial quotations of some unknown fidelity of some copyrighted material is definitely not a "significant market substitute for the protected" material. There's no way I'm going to try and trick a bot into reciting a whole story to me instead of buying a copy of the story. That said, these many-pointed court tests make it really hard to do anything around copyrighted stuff without being a large corporation, which is problematic.

dchichkov 7y ago
If you look at it from a perspective of information theory, you may find that compression and AI are equivalent problems. And we know that compression (including lossy compression) doesn't remove copyrights. Good thing that these court tests are establishing that the argument, rather than being technical, is about creation of value to society. And about potential economic damage to the copyright owners. As long as there's no damage and value to society, it seems that the courts are fine with the use of data.