@Colarusso @mmasnick
Thanks for this much needed context.
I wonder if the piece is a bit too dismissive of the part about the near-literal reproduction of training data. LLMs do things that would certainly be considered plagiarism if done by a human, and not only when prompted with large chunks of the source text. In my legal ignorance, that does seem relevant to copyright, at least potentially infringing.
(The central point about copyright not prohibiting reading stands regardless.)