>”But as long as I legally obtained the information in the book (by buying the book), I don't need to pay the author for the book review itself because a book r

>”But as long as I legally obtained the information in the book (by buying the book), I don't need to pay the author for the book review itself because a book review likely is fair use.” Agreed. A review is generally a personal reaction to a piece of art, and therefore inherently new work. However, if you’re selling summarized versions of the book as a service, it’s a bit trickier. When AI exists that is capable of a personal reaction to a work of art, along with the capability of earning money and therefore being able to purchase the book, these questions will be more pertinent. Until that time, we are dealing with people/companies who have included whole cloth existing work into the technology they’re selling to others as a service — a situation well within the realm of licensing laws, which appear to have been utterly ignored in an attempt to force convenient legislation (similarly to the various scooter companies who littered cities with their product and demanded legislation be enacted to their wishes, rather than those of the existing, law-abiding society). NB: the AI producing books is not the main concern I’m addressing. Most books sold to humans are simply read, not used as fodder for further work — but they still require compensation for merely ingesting the material in the first place. AI is not a human, it is a product. The fact that it can produce further data in no way negates the need to license the data upon which its foundations are built.