Comedian Sara Silverman recently joined forces with bestselling authors Christopher Golden and Richard Kadrey against two unlikely adversaries: ChatGPT’s creator OpenAI and Meta Platforms.
The authors filed a copyright infringement lawsuit in early July in which they claim their copyrighted books were used without their permission as part of training dataset for ChatGPT and similar AI models.
The outcome of this unfolding drama could be more than a simple courtroom win or loss; it could fundamentally redefine the boundaries of artificial intelligence and copyright law. Silverman’s case asks us to look closely at the fair use doctrine — a cornerstone of U.S. copyright law that permits a limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights’ holder. Read: Sarah Silverman’s ChatGPT lawsuit raises big questions for AI More: And thus the ChatGPT backlash has begun Here’s where things get murky and interesting. For a work to be included in the fair use category, it needs to meet several criteria: the purpose and character of the use; the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and substantiality of the portion used and its effect on the market for the original work. The big question now is whether AI’s ingestion and processing of text for training purposes could be considered fair use. Furthermore, would AI’s utilization of the work be considered transformative, thereby providing a unique meaning or purpose to the original wo …