Being paid is not what makes it into a performance. Having an audience, and the purpose of the recitation, are what make it performance.
If I pay a babysitter to look after my kid and they sing the child a song to get them to sleep, it’s not an infringing performance.
even if you are paying ChatGPT to answer your questions, if you ask it to tell you the lyrics of a song and it does so, that is not necessarily infringing.
If I am preparing a legal brief for a copyright case, and I pay a paralegal to transcribe the lyrics of a song, and they do so and send them to me in an email… is that copyright infringement? It seems very unlikely.
I just can’t come to any position on LLMs other than that the users of the LLM have to be held responsible for how they choose to use the output, not the LLM provider.
LLMs need to be aware of the content of copyrighted works in order for them to be able to fully and comprehensively communicate with humans who are immersed in and aware of the content of copyrighted works.
that's only half of it, the half that's been litigated via Xerox and Betamax, no - the manufacturer is not liable for what end users do with their product.
But what Xerox and Sony didn't do to build their machines is pirate everything they could get their hands on as a part of the manufacturing process.
Who says OpenAI pirated it? Unless the content was pirated in the first place simply showing it to an LLM is just like letting your friend borrow your book.
When Google crawls websites to build a search index, we don’t expect Google to pay royalties… all these analogies at least demonstrate that copyright is impossible to apply consistently and our notions about what’s fair are wholly subjective.
If I pay a babysitter to look after my kid and they sing the child a song to get them to sleep, it’s not an infringing performance.
even if you are paying ChatGPT to answer your questions, if you ask it to tell you the lyrics of a song and it does so, that is not necessarily infringing.
If I am preparing a legal brief for a copyright case, and I pay a paralegal to transcribe the lyrics of a song, and they do so and send them to me in an email… is that copyright infringement? It seems very unlikely.
I just can’t come to any position on LLMs other than that the users of the LLM have to be held responsible for how they choose to use the output, not the LLM provider.
LLMs need to be aware of the content of copyrighted works in order for them to be able to fully and comprehensively communicate with humans who are immersed in and aware of the content of copyrighted works.