3 ms·
This has not been determined in courts and your willingness to speak so confidently about it speaks volumes.
by bingaweek 4mo ago
This has not been determined in courts and your willingness to speak so confidently about it speaks volumes.
- simonw 4mo agoThe closest we've come to a court decision on this so far has been the Anthropic case, which did indeed find that training on unlicensed data falls under fair use: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25982181-authors-v-anthropic-ruling/ https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25982181-authors-v-a... > To summarize the analysis that now follows, the use of the books at issue to train Claude and its precursors was exceedingly transformative and was a fair use under Section 107 of the Copyright Act. And, the digitization of the books purchased in print form by Anthropic was also a fair use but not for the same reason as applies to the training copies. Instead, it was a fair use because all Anthropic did was replace the print copies it had purchased for its central library with more convenient space-saving and searchable digital copies for its central library — without adding new copies, creating new works, or redistributing existing copies.
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]