Talk:Artificial intelligence and copyright

Bias?

Doesn't this seem a bit biased: "As of 2023, there were a number of US lawsuits disputing this, arguing that the training of machine learning models infringed the copyright of the authors of works contained in the training data. Commentators have suggested that if the plaintiffs succeed, this may shift the balance of power in favour of large corporations such as Google, Microsoft and Meta which can afford to license large amounts of training data from copyright holders and leverage their own proprietary datasets of user-generated data." ??? It mentions what a commentator speculates might be a (bad for smaller corporations) result if plaintiffs succeed, but doesn't mention what might be a (bad for artists/writers) result if plaintiffs lose. Presumably, although large corporations could better pay for training data, the artists/writers/etc would at least have some hope of getting paid at all whilst having their work ripped off. (And the big corporations are going to hog the field anyway, it's just that they'll have a smaller profit if they have to pay for their training data.) Has no one been a "commentator" on that? 2601:600:9080:D490:A99B:E7DA:A297:1901 (talk) 02:13, 12 June 2023 (UTC)