Comment by cmiles74

Take a look at the judge’s ruling in this Anthropic case:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44488331

Here’s a quote from the ruling:

“First, Authors argue that using works to train Claude’s underlying LLMs was like using works to train any person to read and write, so Authors should be able to exclude Anthropic from this use (Opp. 16). But Authors cannot rightly exclude anyone from using their works for training or learning as such. Everyone reads texts, too, then writes new texts. They may need to pay for getting their hands on a text in the first instance. But to make anyone pay specifically for the use of a book each time they read it, each time they recall it from memory, each time they later draw upon it when writing new things in new ways would be unthinkable. For centuries, we have read and re-read books. We have admired, memorized, and internalized their sweeping themes, their substantive points, and their stylistic solutions to recurring writing problems.”

They literally compare an LLM learning to a person learning and conflate the two. Anthropic will likely win this case because of this anthropomorphisization.