It's an extremely hard line to find, but copyright maximalism isn't the answer to AI's problems. EFF tends to take a copyleft, or "copyfreedom" maximalist view, that any amount of AI ingestion because the good of open access outweighs this bad*. I don't agree.
I'm basically a "what if copyleft, as in FOSS, but for all non-personal data?", where some legal rights remain with the creator but anyone can extend it. AI wise I'm much more critical and I don't think it should be legal to commercialise generative AI full stop because there's no way to "fix" it.
Comments
They're not only charging, but price gouging for access to things written by public bodies such as the building code.
$130 for that, and that's in a damn 3 ring binder.
https://www.crownpub.bc.ca/
I'm trying to daydream some scenario where they have copyright, but exercising the copyright would be a crime or civil damages.
Also US Law: You are not allowed to know the law.
"What is the law?"
Please pay to continue.
*Just my impression-no affiliation.