This makes Apple more smarter to get a license from the NYT and other news organisations for permission to train on their news content for their AI, than to kno

This makes Apple more smarter to get a license from the NYT and other news organisations for permission to train on their news content for their AI, than to knowingly attempt to bypass that and scream 'fair use' after profiting off of training on and outputting verbatim paywalled articles without permission from the copyright holder. News organisations are probably waiting for the NYT to win the case and then similar claims and damages from others could follow; not just from the NYT. The key claim is this: > Vicarious copyright infringement (the idea that Microsoft and various OpenAI affiliates directed, controlled and profited from infringement committed by OpenAI OpCo LLC and OpenAI, LLC) OpenAI knew they needed a license to train their DALL-E AI model from shutterstock, instead of doing so with news organizations, they decided to trample all over it and profit off of copyrighted articles, without permission. The end result of this is a settlement and licensing deal, a similar likely result for Getty v. Stability.