[riquito]

I think he implies that because one can borrow hypothetically any book for free from a library, one could use them for legal training purposes, so the requirement of having your own copy should be moot

[jazzyjackson]

Libraries aren’t just anarchist free for alls they are operating under licensing terms. Google had a big squabble with the university of Illinois Urbana Champaign research library before finally getting permission to scan the books there. Guess what, Google has the full text but books.google.com only shows previews, why is an exercise to the reader literally

[gpm]

Libraries are neither anarchist free for alls nor are they operating under licensing terms with regards to physical books.

They're merely doing what anyone is allowed to with the books that they own, loaning them out, because copyright law doesn't prohibit that, so no license is needed.

[kjkjadksj]

Afaik to scan a book you need to destroy it by cutting the spine so it can feed cleanly into the scanner. Would incur a lot of fines.

[wizzwizz4]

Nah, that's just if you want archival-quality scans. "Good enough for OCR" is a much lower bar.

[mkagenius]

That's what they did. They also destroyed books worth millions in the process.

They didn't think it would be a good idea to re-bind them and distribute it to the library or someone in need.

[ijk]

There are book scanners that don't require cutting the spine, though Anthropic doesn't seem to have used that approach.