Disclaimer: ibid

> It can't just crawl Wikipedia because Fair Use in Wikipedia doesn't constitute Fair use for a commercial AI model.

Why not? The lawyers I've discussed this with socially think that questions like this are unresolved. There are certainly competing legal theories, but we're in uncharted territory. No one knows what the outcome will be until rulings come down or Congress acts.

I find the NYT's argument a little hokey. Where are the damages? No one is using ChatGPT to read NYT articles and the residual value of day old news stories is close to zero.

Training is probably going to turn out to be fair use as the suits settle:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/04/how-we-think-about-cop...

It's the usage and not the training that needs to be policed, and the answer there is going to be that Google or OpenAI or whoever is going to make bank by creating a fine tuned model which can detect copyright infringements and providing access to it to companies to double check gen AI outputs for exact or "similar enough" infringements.