[t_luke]

The precedent people should be paying much more attention to is sampling in music. When it first arose, it really wasn’t clear what status it had. There was at least a decade when people basically thought it was legal to use small samples of other recordings because they were small and the new use turned them into something unrecognisably different. Which was kind of logical, actually, but turned out not to be true!

The current legal requirement to get clearance for all samples only arose after a bunch of court cases in the late 80s/ early 90s, mostly involving quite obscure musicians.

There are a lot of people on here who assume that ‘logic will prevail’ in the courts on questions like use of copyrighted data in training data. History shows that this really isn’t a safe assumption. The courts have historically been extremely favorable to copyright holders. It would be foolish to underestimate the legal risk to openai et al here