Yes, we've known the line is blurry for hundreds of years, that's why we have courts. That has nothing to do with the specific problem of LLMs infringing copyright. LLMs needs to be held to much higher scrutiny because they are not capable of taking legal responsibility for copyright infringement, regardless of whether its verbatim or a more ambiguous case, and their users can't be expected to know off-hand whether the output is copyrighted or not.
Based on this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47960014 it seems like you are just ignorant about the basics of copyright law, and pretending this ignorance is some sort of flaw in the idea of copyright itself.
Yes, we've known the line is blurry for hundreds of years, that's why we have courts. That has nothing to do with the specific problem of LLMs infringing copyright. LLMs needs to be held to much higher scrutiny because they are not capable of taking legal responsibility for copyright infringement, regardless of whether its verbatim or a more ambiguous case, and their users can't be expected to know off-hand whether the output is copyrighted or not.
Based on this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47960014 it seems like you are just ignorant about the basics of copyright law, and pretending this ignorance is some sort of flaw in the idea of copyright itself.