I see both sides of the issue. Training is not infringing, yet reproducing existing works is not a good look. Personally, I think AI is transformational and s

I see both sides of the issue. Training is not infringing, yet reproducing existing works is not a good look. Personally, I think AI is transformational and should be allowed. Moreover, infringement happens only if/when the output is shared by the user that generated it; it is not illegal to reproduce copyrighted works in the privacy of your own home. Regardless, there is literally zero chance of predicting the outcome ahead of time. It will depend entirely on the whims of the judges that try the case. And I do mean “judges”, because anyone watching this should know full well that this will be appealed to the highest level possible. In a landmark case like this, the judges can cite whatever random precedents fit their agenda of which side they believe should win. This also means that the decision probably will be based more on politics than legality. Judges are far from impartial.