Obviously, because it's the equivalent of reading the damn book. These guys are upset that an entity read their book.
If I read Stephen King's book, and spit it back out in different pieces with different wording, that is legal. It doesn't make for a good book, but it's legal.
A person reading a book versus inputting parts of the work into a machine are different things and should be treated differently.
I'm not convinced one way or the other, in any case, but it's incorrect to claim these are equivalent. Even if human creativity worked in the way a LLM does (arguable) a person is way different than software.
In my mind, the only crime you can commit with input is piracy, which is I guess what we are talking about. However, if the LLM came across those legitimately, I can't see it as piracy on the output side. Unless the result is literal plagiarism.
Obviously, because it's the equivalent of reading the damn book. These guys are upset that an entity read their book.
If I read Stephen King's book, and spit it back out in different pieces with different wording, that is legal. It doesn't make for a good book, but it's legal.
A person reading a book versus inputting parts of the work into a machine are different things and should be treated differently.
I'm not convinced one way or the other, in any case, but it's incorrect to claim these are equivalent. Even if human creativity worked in the way a LLM does (arguable) a person is way different than software.
In my mind, the only crime you can commit with input is piracy, which is I guess what we are talking about. However, if the LLM came across those legitimately, I can't see it as piracy on the output side. Unless the result is literal plagiarism.