This seems equivalent to someone buying a hammer from a pawn shop. Upon authorities finding out that hammer had been stolen or used in a crime instead of charging or investigating the Pawn Shop owner, they charge the person who bought the hammer because they made things with the assistance of “stolen goods”.
Used car / firearm / AI-assisted-code / other-example-here
No, it’s equivalent to a loaf of bread that can be magically copied for no cost infinitely. But someone lays claim on that particular loaf on the basis of “intellectual property”.
Someone who once studied how this magic loaf of bread works made a magic cake, so we can all eat cake instead. Obviously the owner of the loaf doesn’t like that and sues, shouting “he’s a thief!”. Millions of morons start to pick up the chant “Thief! Thief! He stole the fire of the Gods! Lock him up!”.
Now the obvious question becomes: When do analogies spiral out of control?
This seems equivalent to someone buying a hammer from a pawn shop. Upon authorities finding out that hammer had been stolen or used in a crime instead of charging or investigating the Pawn Shop owner, they charge the person who bought the hammer because they made things with the assistance of “stolen goods”.
Used car / firearm / AI-assisted-code / other-example-here
Except the pawn shop is known for stealing from the community and the person that bought the hammer knew it was stolen.
Kind of complicates things.
No, it’s equivalent to a loaf of bread that can be magically copied for no cost infinitely. But someone lays claim on that particular loaf on the basis of “intellectual property”.
Someone who once studied how this magic loaf of bread works made a magic cake, so we can all eat cake instead. Obviously the owner of the loaf doesn’t like that and sues, shouting “he’s a thief!”. Millions of morons start to pick up the chant “Thief! Thief! He stole the fire of the Gods! Lock him up!”.
Now the obvious question becomes: When do analogies spiral out of control?