Earlier quoted context omitted.
Human time is certainly valuable to a particular human . However, if I choose to spend time doing something that a machine can do people will not generally choose to compensate me more for it just because it was me doing it instead of a machine. I think it's worth remembering that IP law is generally viewed (at least legally) as existing for the net benefit of society as opposed to for ethical reasons. Certainly many…
> Human time is certainly valuable to a particular human. Human time is valuable to humans in general. When you apply one standard to yourself and another to others, you say it's OK for them to do the same. Human time or life obviously has no objective value, the universe doesn't care. However, we humans have decided to pretend it does because it makes a lot of things easier. > However, if I choose to spend time doin…
> Physical or intellectual should not matter, it is something that belongs to someone and only that person should be allowed to decide how it gets used.
I categorically reject that position. No one has any inherent right to prevent me from imitating him. Quite the opposite - it is good and natural to imitate others. The restriction of that ability is one of the costs of modern society.
> I've argued that LLM training is derivative work, that reasoning is sound AFAICT
Depending on the working definition of "derivative work" which (as you note) has yet to be fully litigated and is also likely to vary to at least some extent between jurisdictions.
But anyhow, my central question was not "is this derivative work" but rather "ought this to be considered as such" hence my comment that we are talking past one another.