The suit demonstrates instances where ChatGTP / Bing Copilot copy from the NYT verbatim. I think it is hard to argue that such copying constitutes "fair use".
However, OAI/MS should be able to fix this within the current paradigm: Just learn to recognize and punish plagiarism via RLHF.
However, the suit goes far beyond claiming that such copying violates their copyright: "Unauthorized copying of Times Works without payment to train LLMs is a substitutive use that is not justified by any transformative purpose."
This is a strong claim that just downloading articles into training data is what violates the copyright. That GTP outputs verbatim copies is a red herring. Hopefully the judge(s) will notice and direct focus on the interesting, high-stakes, and murky legal issues raised when we ask: What about a model can (or can't) be "transformative"?
However, the suit goes far beyond claiming that such copying violates their copyright: "Unauthorized copying of Times Works without payment to train LLMs is a substitutive use that is not justified by any transformative purpose."
This is a strong claim that just downloading articles into training data is what violates the copyright. That GTP outputs verbatim copies is a red herring. Hopefully the judge(s) will notice and direct focus on the interesting, high-stakes, and murky legal issues raised when we ask: What about a model can (or can't) be "transformative"?