The problem isn't so much "reading" (i.e., training on or ingesting) the copyrighted content, it is writing it out again. Artists, writers, and coders are righ

The problem isn't so much "reading" (i.e., training on or ingesting) the copyrighted content, it is writing it out again. Artists, writers, and coders are rightly angered when I can simply say "make a painting of XYZ in the style of Foo", and have a painting rendered that is nearly an exact copy of an item in the training set. Similar analogy for writing or code. I see now that when trying to specify an image of an impossible object with ChatGPT4+DALL-E, it will balk if I say "like an Escher object". I have to be more verbose, and it will not render his signature style. As long as particular artistic or writing or coding styles aren't specify-able and generate-able, this seems like a reasonable fair use solution, and does not require us to suddenly become copyright maximalists. (Without such prohibitions on generation of similar works, we must become copyright maximalists.)