Copyright reserves most rights to the author by default. And copyright laws thought about future changes. Copyright laws (in the US) added fair use, which has

Copyright reserves most rights to the author by default. And copyright laws thought about future changes. Copyright laws (in the US) added fair use, which has four tests. Not all of the tests need to fail for fair use to disappear. Usually two are enough. The one courts love the most is if the copy is used to create something commercial that competes with the original work. From near the top of the article: > I agree that the dynamic of corporations making for-profit tools using previously published material to directly compete with the original authors, especially when that work was published freely, is “bad.” So essentially, the author admits that AI fails this test. Thus, if authors can show the AI fails another test (and AI usually fails the substantive difference test), AI is copyright infringement. Period. The fact that the article gives up that point so early makes me feel I would be wasting time reading more, but I will still do it. Edit: still reading, but the author talks about enumerated rights. Most lawsuits target the distribution of model outputs because that is reproduction, an enumerated right. Edit 2: the author talks about sunstantive differences, admits they happen aboit 2% of the time, but then seems to argue that means they are not infringing at all. No, they are infringing in those instances. Edit 3: the author claims that model users are the infringing ones, but at least one AI company (Microsoft?) had agreed to indemnify users, so plaintiffs have full right to go after the company instead.