Why did the meaning of "copying" get shaky? — Copyright
We used to look only at the result, but now we ask what it learned from, too.
1 · Think first
Before AI, "copying" was judged by how much the result looked like the original. You just put the two side by side.
After AI, one more question got added — is it OK that it learned from other people's work before making anything? Now there are fights even when the results don't look alike.
This still has different answers in different countries, and big court cases are still going on. So don't memorize "this is illegal" — it's better to know what the issue actually is.
2 · Experiment · Before & after
Try it — What changed before and after AI?
Switch the same question between "Before AI" and "After AI." The rules didn't disappear — there's just one more thing to judge.
Figure
Judging only the result vs judging what it learned from too
The rules didn't go away — there's just one more box to judge.
3 · Quiz
Quick check
Three questions. Pick an answer and it's marked right away, with the reason why.
Today in one line
Today in one line
We used to look only at the result,
but now we ask what it learned from, too.
Learn more
- A document where Japan's government drew the limits of its "AI training is free to do" rule itself (in Japanese) — Japan's approach to AI and copyright (Agency for Cultural Affairs, 2024)
- The European rule that lets rights holders mark their work in advance as "don't use for training" — Directive (EU) 2019/790, Article 4
- A US Copyright Office report that lays out the training data question but stops short of a final answer — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 3: Generative AI Training (pre-publication version, 2025)