> it _looks up_ stuff in a database of articles. That is clearly not the case. There isn't anything like enough storage space in typical LLMs to maintain a "da

> it _looks up_ stuff in a database of articles. That is clearly not the case. There isn't anything like enough storage space in typical LLMs to maintain a "database" of all the training data. If an article can be reproduced from an extremely sparse representation using a stochastic algorithm, that seems to me to be prima facie evidence that the article didn't contain much (or possibly, any) significant creative content to begin with. Certainly I would expect to find less creativity in an allegedly factual news article than in a piece of acknowledged fiction. Only creative works are copyrightable in the United States. There are soi-disant "artists" who produce "artworks" that are (e.g.) nothing but a pure white rectangle. That doesn't make <div style="background-color:white;width:100%;height:100%;"></div> any kind of copyright infringement.