The court, which stressed that it’s not opining on fair use, said that a jury could undoubtedly find that the output infringes on Martin’s works.
Well of course it does. Llms can only talk about what they know, they can’t talk about these books if the books are part of its knowledge, similarly like how I can’t talk about the books if I haven’t read them. The entire point is that the LLM got the data from the books (and of course without paying) and with that, open AI and others are profiting “massively” from it without giving anything back to the author.
Llms, as they currently are, should just be prohibited, or we should abolish copyright entirely
Well of course it does. Llms can only talk about what they know, they can’t talk about these books if the books are part of its knowledge, similarly like how I can’t talk about the books if I haven’t read them. The entire point is that the LLM got the data from the books (and of course without paying) and with that, open AI and others are profiting “massively” from it without giving anything back to the author.
Llms, as they currently are, should just be prohibited, or we should abolish copyright entirely