> is a derivative work of the original works used for training No it's not. No judge in the US has ruled training to be automatically infringement. > Therefo

> is a derivative work of the original works used for training No it's not. No judge in the US has ruled training to be automatically infringement. > Therefore, the resulting model should abide by all the license requirements Or it could just be ignored because it is not infringement. > which by definition, only covers human produced material You've conflated 2 things. It could be the case that the new work created by the AI does not have copyright protections. But that is completely unrelated to if training on other works is infringement. Which no judge has said it is.