Hacker News Reader

>shouldn’t it be on the AI company to train using legally acquired content in the first place

I don't think so. It's not illegal to look at or learn from copyrighted materials. If you start producing the materials it becomes a different question. I think the same applies to AI.

View on HN

Your argument doesn’t work because OpenAI has admitted that ChatGPT is producing copyrighted material. They’re trying to carve an exception for AI, but have already acknowledged that training does copy the materials, literally, and that it does not “learn” from the the same way humans do. The intent with AI may be to remix them, but the whole reason there are multiple lawsuits here (as well as with Stable Diffusion and other NNs) is because they have repeatedly demonstrated they sometimes memorize the training data and can produce it more or less verbatim. They have violated current copyright law. In that light, we have two primary options: change the law, or enforce the current law. OpenAI is hoping to change the law, but whether they have copied some training data and produced it for the output is not even up for debate, this is already the different question you referred to.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com