Although everyone probably wishes otherwise, there isn't really a hard objective line for determining if something is infringing or not. And that's actually a good thing! But it means that, in the end, it's up to a judge to weigh a bunch of different, rather fuzzy, factors.
We could very well distinguish between machine learning and human learning although they're no different from each other in principle.
And although, we can't say that ML is plagiarism, at scale it breaches our other moral principles like privacy and individual identity.
Let's say in 10 years from now Google'll train ML on (close to) all the data available in the world, be it text, visual or audio. Would they be able to prompt this AI: "You are George Wilkinson from Colorado ** st. 23". How close will it be from real George on whose data it was trained on?
We can't tune our human learning to this level of precision, but it is only a matter of time for the machine.
It's also important to note these laws were always intended to strike a fair balance between the copyright owner and the good of society as a whole. Copyright is not an end in itself.