>> Translating a work would absolutely be derivative (consider the case of translating a literary work between languages: this is a classic example of a derivat

>> Translating a work would absolutely be derivative (consider the case of translating a literary work between languages: this is a classic example of a derivative work) True for literature, which can be copyrighted. Not true for logic. Code that performs the same function but is written independently can't, by definition, violate copyright. It could violate a patent, but it's much harder to patent code. However, in the AI case, the models themselves do nothing even approaching such translation. They fully incorporate what are essentially just compressed representations of existing works into their weights. I'd guess if any single copyright holder could show that their work could be substantially retrieved from the model with the right query string, they'd have a reasonable claim on royalties from the entire model, or else the whole model would have to be thrown out.