I think the idea of copyright being applicable to training data in the first place is absurd. The point of copyright isn't supposed to be "no one can ever use m

I think the idea of copyright being applicable to training data in the first place is absurd. The point of copyright isn't supposed to be "no one can ever use my things for anything", it's "no one can take my work and claim they made it, or give people access to it without asking me first". When data is given to a neural network for training, that is neither of those cases (training an AI on someone's work doesn't reproduce that work, especially when the training set contains tons of other peoples' work; and if your work is accessible enough to become training data in the first place, then at the very least you have given access to it for the person using it as training data). So trying to claim copyright prevents your work from being used as AI training data is a total perversion of copyright intent. Copyright was always meant to be a protection against credit theft and others profiting by reproducing your work without your permission. It has largely become a capitalistic troll playground where "you've used my work anywhere" and "this seems kind of like my work" are treated as grounds for legal action. And that's messed up.