I understand the concept of fair use (I think) but I can't see how it applies to Copilot.
Google didn't create new books from the contents of existing ones (whether you agree that they should have been allowed to store the books or not) but Copilot is creating new code/apps from existing ones.
Edit: I guess my understanding of fair use was wrong. I stand corrected.
It would help the transformativeness, but it would substantially change the effect upon the market. By creating competing products with the copyrighted material, there is a higher degree of transformative, but you also end up disrupting the marketplace.
I don't know how a court would decide this, but I do think the facts in future GPT-3 cases are sufficiently different from Author's Guild that I could see it going any way. Plus, I think the prevalence of GPT-3 and the ramifications of the ruling one way or another could lead some future case to be heard by the Supreme Court. A similar case could come up in California, or another state where the 2nd Circuit Artist Guild case isn't precedent.
However, where does one draw the line between fair use and derivative works?
Creating something based on other stuff (Google creating AI books from the existing ones for example) would possibly be fair use I think but would it not also be derivative works?
There's no clear line and there can never be because the world is too complex. We leave up determination to the court system.
Google Books is considered fair use because they got sued and successfully used fair use as a defense. Until someone sues over Copilot, everyone is an armchair lawyer.
This is the clearest display yet that moderation on HN has absolutely nothing to do with your purported values like constructive criticism, and has everything to do with whether dang agrees with you or not.
I actually have no idea what you were arguing about, nor which side you were on, nor what your argument was. I haven't paid enough attention to know those things, because (a) I don't want to, (b) I don't need to, and (c) not doing it leaves me in the desirable state of being incapable of agreeing or disagreeing.
It's a happy fact that figuring out people's arguments is often unnecessary for moderating the threads, especially in cases where people are breaking the site guidelines. Everyone needs to follow the site guidelines regardless of what the topic is, what their argument is, and how right they are or feel they are. Please stick to the rules when posting here.
Fair use is a defense for cases of copyright infringement, which means you're starting of from a case of copyright infringement, which sort-of muckys up the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing. And considering it's a weighted test, it's hardly very cut-and-dry at that.
Fair use is an exception to copyright and, by definition, copyright licenses.