Timeline for How well is Substantial Part defined in copyright law?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 3 at 14:59 | comment | added | User65535 | @Trish Indeed, but that is a different question. | |
| Jul 3 at 13:05 | comment | added | Trish | If your LLM creates the very same output as a book, then this begs the question: Do you have a license to reproduce the book? And did you infringe the copyright of the book by training? The letter is up in several courts at the moment. | |
| Jul 3 at 11:01 | answer | added | Paul Johnson | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 3 at 9:35 | comment | added | User65535 | @quarague As I say in the question that woudl probably be the best I could hope for, but in the absence of that some authoritative writing I guess. Ot seems liek the sort of thing that comes up. | |
| Jul 3 at 8:14 | comment | added | quarague | I would assume that the definition you quoted is all the legal definition there is. Are you looking for case law where some specific examples where deemed to be or not to be a substantial part? What else do you hope to see in an answer? | |
| Jul 3 at 6:27 | history | asked | User65535 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |