Actual boomers are generally defined as those born between 1946 and 1964, which includes everyone who is in their 60s. But at least this gives you a shorthand way to say "I don't know the meaning of common terms and I can't do math!", lol!

No, this would be like publishers of textbooks suing people who photocopied their textbooks instead of buying them, and used the knowledge learned in the pursuit of their jobs.

If you read an article and write something new about what you learned, you haven't violated copyright. If you read an article, put an unauthorized copy of the article in your research notebook, and write something new then you have violated copyright. Not when you wrote something new, but before that when you put a copy in your notebook. And training an AI starts by making a local copy of training data. So developers may have violated copyright well before the training was complete.

There actually are rules regarding the use of photocopiers in libraries. In the 90s, I remember posted signs warning patrons that it is illegal to photocopy entire books. Ultimately it is up to publishers to enforce those rules. They often look the other way, until they don't.

Don't worry, you can still unlock your phone. The regulation applies to "remote" recognition systems: "notion of remote biometric identification system as used in this Regulation should be defined functionally, as an AI system intended for the identification of natural persons at a distance through the comparison of a personâ(TM)s biometric data with the biometric data contained in a reference database, and without prior knowledge whether the targeted person will be present and can be identified"

There is a lot more to both religions than a collection of quotes from their founders. "Calling our Islam's immorality relative to Christianity" on that basis is like calling out Europe as immoral relative to the US based only on reading the Declaration of Independence.

Pakistan asked Wikipedia to change. Wikipedia didn't ask Pakistan to change. Only one of them is imposing their values, and it's not Wikipedia.

Neither should Pakistan tell Wikipedia editors "how to live". Pakistan can either welcome Wikipedia to their country as is, or they can refuse to show hospitality and ban Wikipedia from their country. If they choose the latter, it's their loss.

Making a losing argument is not fraud.

You're just proving the point. Apple is suing over a logo, not just a word. AmEx / TMobile / UPS trademarked colors that only apply to their own industry. Same is true of King and Bethesda. In other words, Costco can still sell Apple Pie Filling, Blue Note records is not threatened by AmEx, and Crush can still sell soda. Whereas Snap is potentially threatening all of its competitors, who also sell spectacles. The two are not the same.

A warrant gives the government authority to sieze things, and sieze necessarily implies "take away". While it's true that usually seizure affects physical things like computers, intangible things are not immune to seizure. For instance, the government routinely seizes domain names. While it's true that seizure is often used for gathering evidence (where copying would be sufficient), it is also used for public safety as in this case. For instance when the TSA seizes your water bottle they are not gathering evidence against you, they ostensibly doing it to protect the public.

"Seize" implies "deprive" and therefore "modify". When the FBI seizes contraband from a shipment, the shipment has been modified. The shipment now lacks the contraband, just as the servers now lack the malicious code.