If creating LLMs based on copyrighted data is found to be legal, all that will do is allow giant companies to sell copyrighted work without crediting the original authors, while leaving everyone else in the dirt.
> all that will do is allow giant companies to sell copyrighted work without crediting the original authors, while leaving everyone else in the dirt.
I'm not sure I follow. But even accepting your premise - I'm not sure how it will favour giant companies over anyone else. The models are already in the wild and anyone can use them. In some ways - large companies are less likely to do anything that might open them up to legal risks or PR downsides.
Maybe this is more of a Napster moment than it is a big tech powergrab?
GPT is owned by Microsoft, LLama by Facebook and Bard by Google. If you trained a model on google public properties and started distributing it for money (or its output), we'd be sued into oblivion real quick.
My point was that the models exist, people are fine tuning them and/or releasing open clones. There are models of comparable power to the state of the art without any controlling interest from a big tech company.
The Google memo covered this in detail and it was what makes me want to question the "AI is owned by big tech" angle.
Price/profit != value. Sure, Hollywood movies bring in a ton of money, but I get way more value from daily indie youtubers than a blockbuster released once a month.
