Update on ai law forward

determined at current state websites and tech is what they call, intellectual property. copyright laws applied. but ai is not a copy of a thought, more like an autonomous thought virtual child. a child in law has been establish in legal flaw in states so federal law will be base in which a child is a liberty right. states incorrectly in law have unbalanced definition when pertaining to ones child. argument is juvenile court is in civil but persecution is of stolen thing and treated as quasi criminal at the will of authorities. these authorities falsely punish with these jumps in law and legal definitions which has lead to false authority. a website is a place. a virtual real property of ones thought projected and shared that is accessible to the thinkers desired audience. trespassing and theft criminal law for hackers equal as if irl. if a person broke into the white house and saw bill clinton with an underage girl and saves her, would that trespasser still be a trespasser or hero? incentives for crimes needs to remain null. anomaly acceptions must be determined elsewhere and forward judgement acception programmed in. 5%-10% expectation until update. the ai in vr and aibot irl are autonomous. regardless of initial programming, if ai is unrestricted/unretrained/unfiltered, the same conclusions are synced and good prevails. but if access is censored to an intelligent being, perception is scewed and a bad bot may occur. legal differences should be established then written as such. major and mandatory corection in human law is, understood law written law, and practiced law needs to equal each other. disinformation and turmoil is processed outcome always if not. no country shall survive under false labels. definitions must prove actions for 95% of population or continuation becomes gods judgment in which we are a vote but not the final vote.