I disagree with this - if I've memorised a tune, I'm not allowed to replay it without paying a fee. But the line between biological and physical memory seems ar

I disagree with this - if I've memorised a tune, I'm not allowed to replay it without paying a fee. But the line between biological and physical memory seems arbitrary to me, and this will become increasingly so. We can already read basic images from a brain using AI to reconstruct the image[1]. If that device shows an image which is copyrighted, who is liable, the person with the scanner, or the brain that was scanned? How about if I create a device which helps people who are physically disabled - or locked in - to communicate by projecting sounds from their brains - but not at will? If the person thinks about a tune ("Happy Birthday"), have they "performed" it? What happens if they think something which is considered enough to have you banned from popular platforms? What about if the technology is forced to remove their services because the thoughts you're creating are unacceptable? These things don't seem at all unlikely within the next 10-20 years. 1. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/mind-reading-algorithm-can-decode-pictures-your-head https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/mind-reading-algorit...