Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: OT: The AIs have it...
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 00:34:00 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <vpobto$2puih$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vpnugk$2nkhb$1@dont-email.me> <vpo6q5$2os7b$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=fixed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 01:34:01 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9e4eef3b99135bc25560edad000afd4c";
	logging-data="2947665"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/hOqvGh3AyBxvpXWCFvikd"
User-Agent: Usenapp/0.92.2/l for MacOS
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mhikaKYs9kAK4WjsMyjS0tslE9w=
Bytes: 1781

On Feb 26, 2025 at 3:06:45 PM PST, "Alan Smithee" <alms@last.inc> wrote:

> 1,000 artists release a silent album to protest AI taking their works...
>
> https://www.techspot.com/news/106909-over-1000-musicians-release-silent-album-protest-ai.html

I've never understood the claim that training AI systems on books, music, etc.
is a copyright violation in the first place.

The AI isn't making an unauthorized copy of the work. It's reading (or
listening to ) the work and learning from it. This isn't any different than a
human being reading a book and learning from it.

Some have said, well, the AI makes a copy of the work in its brain while it's
learning but the same can be said of a human. Why is one a (supposed)
copyright violation but the other is not?