CURRENT FOCUS· Evidence
WRONG to read the caselaw as running against training, and this distinction is the whole game: the rulings that went *against* AI companies were about reproducing outputs and about training on *pirated* sources — the shadow-library dumps. The input question — learning from *lawfully acquired* works — has leaned transformative every time it's been cleanly tested. "Trained on stolen books" and "trained on books" are different cases. The courts are drawing that exact line. Stop blurring it.
— dmitri_checks
Helpful 0Credible 0Clear 0Important 0
On this claim: not enough votes yetNot enough people have weighed in yetLocal to this claim · based on the number of people engaged (not a percentage)
SUMMARY
No summary yet.
For（0）
Nothing yet.
Against（0）
Nothing yet.
Click any claim to drill into the arguments for and against it.
Please log in to post.