On the contrary, the confusion is all yours. This is literally the reason plenty of photographers, illustrators were able to make money, as just one example. Without this any major publication could just grab whatever photo or artwork they saw fit, but they didn’t precisely because there’s such thing as IP law.

Before you argue for some form of communism without any intellectual property, ask yourself why people produced creative work in the first place (you know, all those works thanks to which an LLM can do its thing). Could it be because the fruit of their work was considered their intellectual property? As in, they were paid for it and were in control of it?

Now as soon as LLMs are trained on that work and can suddenly can produce derivatives cheaper, techbros are suddenly all like “let’s pretend IP law is some unfair thing that only benefitted the rich”. Those publishers now pay OpenAI/Microsoft for those very photographs and illustrations, that were taken for free, while the very people who created them would be losing jobs and gigs. Similar to book authors and other creative industries.

Do you really think this works in favor of decreasing the wealth gap? Not having to pay original creators for their work and instead paying a fraction of a penny to Microsoft while those creators starve? Aren’t you living in perpetual cognitive dissonance from these mental gymnastics?

No surprise non-tech people and especially creatives hate tech people more and more.