For running, you’d probably be right. No copyright on running. But for copyrighted content, it’s a thorny issue. You already cannot do whatever you want when y

For running, you’d probably be right. No copyright on running. But for copyrighted content, it’s a thorny issue. You already cannot do whatever you want when you buy a book (or a cd, or a dvd); it’s for personal use unless you pay more. Surely you can quote some paragraphs or take a couple of screenshots, and you can learn the overall content, but you cannot reuse it in its entirety. Also, the usage of those contents is kind of “rate limited” by the fact that an human must spit out those answers. Now with AI you get a kind of an opaque system which “ingests” data in some way that can be considered “compression” (rather than “summarization” or “understanding”) and can spit this out at very large rates. Is this a fair thing? If you got a small model, probably your model has learned the concept, so I could agree that copyright is not a concern; but with LLMs? The NYY lawsuit is very relevant. Also, I suspect that humans will adapt and create content which is less useful or harder to digest for AIs - maybe by making it worse for humans as well. Or they will use AIs to create bad content on their topics of expertise to make AI training data worse. There’s a serious risk of horrible content flooding the internet (and the publishing world). LLMs are useful but risky. We should take care and consider 2nd order consequences.