> The thought that learning from copyrighted content makes new output copyrighted is pretty far fetched and wouldn't apply to a human.
It literally applies to a human. Copyright is about reproducing the same work. "Transforming" the work means copyright doesn't apply.
Most of your brain is trained on ideas that come from someone else's proprietary IP, whether you realize it or not. Think about that next time you're unintentionally humming that catchy tune from a Coca Cola commercial.
The copy/transform distinction isn't just about fair use parodies or commentary, but things like writing music or drawing paintings or writing fictional books in a similar style to someone else (and using some of the same ideas).
The crux here is that we can't accept that machine learning is "learning". We think of it as copying, therefore subject to copyright.
It doesn't help that Copilot in edge cases will copy. But in many cases the resulting snippet is substantially a new work.
But AI is inevitable, and therefore we'll have to start treating machines like human agents. It'll be really weird.
