Storing a copy of the content isn't the relevant part. It's what that copy is used for.

In a search engine, it's used to direct traffic to the original author. In Midjourney, it's used to create an alternative to the original author.

I certainly use the blurb in search results at times to get an alternative to the original author (especially if the blurbed content is paywalled).

In the US, that blurb is covered by fair use. Google doesn't regurgitate the entire published work.

These many AI lawsuits will likely settle whether training LLMs falls under fair use.

> Google doesn't regurgitate the entire published work.

Wrong. Here's Google's cache of an entire paywalled article currently on the front page of HN: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:c-xOMj...

You can get these by clicking the three dots next to any search result, expanding the options in the pop-over, and then clicking "cached."

I mean, it seems like casds of AI regurtitating entire works verbatim is pretty rare. It happens but is unusual.

And also not really what this is about. If AI was just another libgenisis it would be a lot less controversial.