Comment by teddyh

> Isn't google search business built on "unethical sourced data", they keep a pirated copy of every website they encounter and feed it to their algorithms.

Yes. Do two wrongs make a right? An accusation of hypocricy is not an argument.

> Isn't by definition human culture built on "unethical sourced data" remixed by the human brain?

Do not compare AI to human brains. They do not work the same at all, but however similar they are (or might become), they are legally distinct, since copyright law is meant to encourage humans, not AI, to create works.

The problem is people at large companies creating these AI models, wanting the freedom to copy artists’ works when using it, but these large companies also want to keep copyright protection intact, for their regular business activities. They want to eat the cake and have it too. And they are arguing for essentially eliminating copyright for their specific purpose and convenience, when copyright has virtually never been loosened for the public’s convenience, even when the exceptions the public asks for are often minor and laudable. If these companies were to argue that copyright should be eliminated because of this new technology, I might not object. But now that they come and ask… no, they pretend to already have, a copyright exception for their specific use, I will happily turn around and use their own copyright maximalist arguments against them.