Surely this means it is perfectly fine to train on people's voices without their permission and then claim the generated songs (with their voices) as your own a

Surely this means it is perfectly fine to train on people's voices without their permission and then claim the generated songs (with their voices) as your own and use the 'fair use' excuse just because paying for a license means it will make the grift too expensive for large tech companies and extremely costly for smaller ones? I don't think so. Given that Runway partnered with Getty Images with a licensing deal [0], and the same with Meta partnering with musicians to clone their voices (with permission and compensation) [1] it only tells us that is where it is going and how the Stability AI v Getty lawsuit will settle with such a deal rather than attempting to violate the copyright of the author and then nonsensically claim 'fair use' with their commercial offering. [0] https://www.axios.com/2023/12/04/runway-getty-images-ai-video https://www.axios.com/2023/12/04/runway-getty-images-ai-vide... [1] https://www.zdnet.com/article/meta-just-entered-the-ai-chatbot-race-with-three-major-product-announcements/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/meta-just-entered-the-ai-chatb...