The IPKat

SEPTEMBER 24, 2023

In my opinion, there has never been any talk of such works, because that would be the same as talking about non-distinctive trademarks. 340 (1991) , Case C-5/08, Infopaq (2009) , Eastern Book v. So, there is no literal and non-literal copying of a work. Rural, 499 U.S. Modak (2008) 1 SCC 1 ). This is pure fiction.

Copyright 138

Copyright Derivative Work Music Copying 138

IP Intelligence

JUNE 7, 2023

2009); Authors Guild v. Challenges for Content Owners in AI Training No content owner will ever be able to demonstrate that it was their work, and their work alone, that enabled a usable AI model. Second, the number of copies/downloads/users/seat licenses model simply does not work in the AI training context.

Fair Use 105

Fair Use Licensing Music Art 105

LexBlog IP

JUNE 7, 2023

2009); Authors Guild v. Challenges for Content Owners in AI Training No content owner will ever be able to demonstrate that it was their work, and their work alone, that enabled a usable AI model. Second, the number of copies/downloads/users/seat licenses model simply does not work in the AI training context.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Music Art 52

IP Intelligence

JUNE 6, 2023

2009); Authors Guild v. Challenges for Content Owners in AI Training No content owner will ever be able to demonstrate that it was their work, and their work alone, that enabled a usable AI model. Second, the number of copies/downloads/users/seat licenses model simply does not work in the AI training context.

Fair Use 40

Fair Use Licensing Music Art 40