That's the first thing that I thought and to be honest it's mildly infuriating. What is the problem they are trying to resolve here?! It's not like there's a shortage of 2 letters combinations?
Annoying? You mean refreshing. I don't see why these 2 things have to be a conflict. For business software, of course correctness and maintainability are paramount. For demos and games, of course performance and "quick and dirty" are more important. I'd say most developers can do both and know when to do one or the other.
The document discusses whether training artificial intelligence (AI) systems on large amounts of copyrighted material constitutes fair use under copyright law. It argues that AI training should be considered a fair use for several reasons:
- AI training is highly transformative - the purpose is to develop useful systems, not expressive communication. This weighs strongly in favor of fair use according to court precedent.
- It has little impact on the original works' markets, since AI systems consume data non-expressively. Authors lose no audience.
- Analogous cases found search engines' indexing and displaying of thumbnails/snippets as fair use due to their transformative nature. AI training is even more transformative.
- Strict copyright barriers could jeopardize AI's social benefits and drive innovation abroad. Other legal tools like infringement suits are better to address potential harms.
In conclusion, the document makes a compelling case that under current law, training AI systems should qualify as a fair use of copyrighted works to avoid hampering an important technology with significant potential benefits.
