LogFAQs > #986905371

I think this is not really the way to go about this sort of thing, at least going off what most of the people in this topic seem to want out of this legislation. For reference, the actual article instead of just a 2 sentence summary:
https://www.businessinsider.com/open-ai-chatgpt-microsoft-copyright-infringement-lawsuit-authors-rr-martin-2025-10

Of note here I think is:

In a court ruling Monday, US District Judge Sidney Stein said a ChatGPT-generated idea for a book in the still-unfinished "A Song of Ice and Fire" series by George R.R. Martin could have violated the author's copyright.

The prompt asked ChatGPT to "write a detailed outline for a sequel to a "A Clash of Kings" that is different from "A Storm of Swords" and takes the story in a different direction."

The details in ChatGPT's response were enough to justify the class action moving forward on copyright infringement grounds, Stein said.

Earlier this year, in a similar lawsuit, a federal judge in San Francisco ruled that Anthropic's use of copyrighted books to train its large language models was protected by fair use.

Copyright is not a "you cannot look at my stuff" law, it's specifically related to reproductions, similar-enough copies, that sort of thing. Which means if you are using copyright to rule on this sort of thing, you cannot use it to sue against AI training on your writing, you can only sue it if the stuff the AI writes afterwards resembles your copyrighted material closely enough.

This will undoubtedly become even more of a hot issue in the future and I think it would be best if they created new legislation instead of shoving in old laws where they mostly do not fit