>or produced replicas from memory and sold them (the most comparable example), I’d be sued.

This is not the most comparable example, because it's not what ChatGPT is doing. The most comparable example is if you were hired as a contractor and the employer asked you to write verbatim some copyright content you'd memorised. If the employer then published it, they'd be the one liable, not you.

>Humans produce derivative work all the time, and it’s fine for LLM’s to do that, but you can’t do it verbatim.

Nobody's suggesting preventing humans from consuming any copyrighted content just because in future they might recite some of it verbatim, but that's what NYT want for LLMs.