> (2) If it were an infringement, it would severely hinder AI progress, which has many societal benefits. This is one of the most horrific and weakest argument

> (2) If it were an infringement, it would severely hinder AI progress, which has many societal benefits. This is one of the most horrific and weakest arguments supporting the unlicensed training of images / data for commercial purposes as 'fair use' from OpenAI I have ever seen. There is more to AI than LLMs and nothing is being hindered. It is just them inventing excuses in avoiding to pay for the data they are using for training. The fact that OpenAI obtained permission from Shutterstock for its training data for DALL-E 2 suggests that they knew that Shutterstock would sue them if they didn't and commercialized it, just like how Getty unsurprisingly caught Stable Diffusion generated images containing their watermark. Either use public domain images for free, or just pay for the sources for your training data if you're commercializing it. OpenAI already did that once already and they have plenty of money to do it again. No excuses.