It's as fair use as this scenario:
I can use 6 seconds of a movie in a clip as fair use so I cut an entire movie up into 6 second clips and play them all one after another for you.
It's as fair use as this scenario:
I can use 6 seconds of a movie in a clip as fair use so I cut an entire movie up into 6 second clips and play them all one after another for you.
No, it’s been decided by the courts to be fair use.
I’m not sure why people think they understand IP law better than the courts just because they don’t like the answer
> I’m not sure why people think they understand IP law better than the courts just because they don’t like the answer
Because judges are human beings and can be catastrophically wrong; e.g., see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford
Settled out of court does not mean the court has decided what is fair use in the case.
https://www.goodwinlaw.com/en/insights/publications/2025/06/...
https://admin.bakerlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ECF-23...
> For the print library copies that Anthropic purchased and then converted into digital library copies, Anthropic already enjoyed entitlement to keep the copies in its library. The purpose of the copying was to keep them in its library but with more favorable storage and searchability properties. Copying the entire work was exactly what this purpose required. There was no surplus copying. The source copy was destroyed.
> The third fair use factor favors fair use for the purchased library copies converted from print to digital.
...
> This order grants summary judgment for Anthropic that the training use was a fair use. And, it grants that the print-to-digital format change was a fair use for a different reason. But it denies summary judgment for Anthropic that the pirated library copies must be treated as training copies.
Ah yes because “the courts” have an unblemished historical record of never getting anything wrong