The open question is how to handle machines that mimic the process.
It's not really an open question, except for software engineers who've talked themselves into thinking of humans as computers. A machine is not a human mind, so does not benefit from the legal exceptions and rights granted to the latter.
"A machine is not a human mind, so does not benefit from the legal exceptions and rights granted to the latter."
Five years ago this was true. It likely will not be true, eventually. The only question is where we are in this process.
Huh? You brought up "cognition," but now that has nothing to do with it?
> It's a legal question regarding large scale compilation of data.
The legal question of does "copyright goes away if your violation is big enough?"
>> "A machine is not a human mind, so does not benefit from the legal exceptions and rights granted to the latter."
> Five years ago this was true. It likely will not be true, eventually. The only question is where we are in this process.
Because of the meme magic of enthusiastic software engineers will end the "carbon chauvinism" of humanity forever?
Yeah, right.
This is just a legal fact. It has nothing to do with how an LLM operates internally, or whether an LLM is at all similar to a human mind in terms of internal mechanics.
> "The legal question of does "copyright goes away if your violation is big enough?"
Don't be fatuous.
> "Because of the meme magic"
No, because of the way the law works.
> This really isn't clear because cognition is treated as a special exception to copyright.
Human cognition; not the latest algorithms and their output, which some enthusiastic software engineers eagerly confuse for cognition. It's actually pretty clear.