I fucked with the title a bit. What i linked to was actually a mastodon post linking to an actual thing. but in my defense, i found it because cory doctorow boosted it, so, in a way, i am providing the original source here.

please argue. please do not remove.

  • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    What constitutes fair use?

    17 U.S.C. § 107

    Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

    GenAI training, at least regarding art, is neither criticism, comment, news reporting scholarship, nor research.

    AI training is not done by scientists but engineers of a corporative entity with a long term profit goal.

    So, by elimination, we can conclude that none of the purposes covered by the fair use doctrine apply to Generative AI training.

    Q.E.D.

    • General_Effort@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      “Such as” means that these are examples and not an exhaustive list.

      Can you explain how the 3 factors you listed rule out scholarship or research purpose? Regarding the first factor, how do you determine that AI developers are all engineers and never computer scientists?