This argument every time I hear it is so ridiculous. It's like saying that the CNC machine should also be given mandatory time off each year just as all the ot

This argument every time I hear it is so ridiculous. It's like saying that the CNC machine should also be given mandatory time off each year just as all the other factory workers. One is a machine, the other a human, what rights and laws apply to one don't mean they make sense and should be applied to the other. The better framing is, should art students also be allowed to make derived work from copyrighted images without permission? The output image from a model is basically a derivation from it's entire dataset, I mean this is mathematically demonstrable. If it wasn't for a few stochastic parts of the model and explicitly added randomization, it be deterministic even. It takes copyrighted work + prompt and outputs derived image. I don't think the question of derivation is being debated that much though, the question is if it's fair use. As in, deriving from copyrighted work a ML model, maybe that's fair use. And that's what has to be figured out.