Raw LLM Responses

@jmhorange, a human learns to draw and paint by looking at images. In most cases, the human doesn't need to pay to access those images. If AI is training merely by looking at images that people can look at freely online, then it's not violating copyright. Incidentally, I'm an artist myself, but not professionally. I've made a little bit of money from a commission I did that was published in a book, and I did a booklet of illustrations that I sold myself. Overall my artistic endeavors have been pretty close to break even. I've had people use my art on T-shirts without first getting permission. In one case I was able to contact the person and got a few free shirts out of it. I've talked to other artists. Unless art is your bread and butter, legal action is generally not worth the time and expense in such cases. Also, I wouldn't want to discourage what I consider to be "fair use." Generally I don't bother with them if someone is using my art on a website, as that's kind of what it was originally intended for. I like it to be seen, and when possible, I like to have my name associated with it, but I have a real job (retail industry -- doesn't exactly make one rich) and I generally don't mind people using it online, even without my name, depending, I suppose, on how much traffic they get. The main thing that bugs me is when someone claims that someone else drew it, and then I'm willing to jump through hoops to get that corrected -- as that's blatant dishonesty and misleading the public. But if someone scrapes the internet and finds my art and uses it to train generative AI models, that's an honor, as I'm happy to be helping to push the technology forward in some small way, and that's also entirely within fair use -- an AI learning from looking at art that's free to see online is *not* a copyright violation.