Perhaps a section on what the differences are might be helpful. For example what role does style play in the summary. I dont think that the summary of wiki is in the style of George R Martin.
The issue here is, what are creators allowed to own and control. It’s about the fundamental question of what copyright gives the creators control over.
Does creating a picture mean you own the right to its description? And you have the right to prevent anyone else from describing your picture?
In general i think fair use serves as a good balance for these types of questions.
Go to imdb and see some of plot summaries there. Is that what you call "novelization"? Are you going to sue that site?
No, because that's not what the definition of novelization is. By novelization i mean when someone makes a novel version of a movie.
The point im trying to make here is we regularly expect translations from one medium to another to be copyrighted, so why is this different?
> Are you going to sue that site?
No, because i believe it to be a pretty text book example of fair use.
Fair use in usa is based on 4 factors - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#U.S._fair_use_factors
I think LLM summarizing a work would largely meet the traditional test.
Im also not sure why llm summarizing the work wouldnt be in the interest of the work. It seems like it would to me to the same extent a wikipedia summary would be.