Zero GPT Charges Against Writers for ‘Copyright Issues’! A Comic Insight

 

Synopsis:  In a world turned upside down, GPT detector tools drag human writers to court for “stealing” creativity from AI. From Einstein to the Bible, everyone’s labeled artificial until one old writer, P C Thomas, stands up and proves how absurd the machines have become. What follows is a comic, chaotic trial that questions who truly owns imagination, man or machine.

When AI Detectors Became the Villains of Imagination 

In a world where AI detectors rise to power, human creativity stands accused.

Once upon a near future, in the bustling city of NeuraNet, the balance between human writers and AI tools collapsed overnight. It all began when a mysterious law was passed by the Algorithmic Authority of Artificial Justice (AAAJ), a law that allowed GPT detector tools to sue human writers for "copyright violations."

What is the reason?

Because their writings looked too good to be human.

 The Great “ZeroGPT vs Humanity” Case 

The courtroom of the Cyber Supreme Court was packed. On one side stood the mechanical prosecutors, sleek holographic lawyers from ZeroGPT, glowing blue with lines of floating code. On the other side sat the trembling yet defiant human writers, clutching their pens like swords.

Their charge:

“Creating 100% AI-generated content while pretending to be human.”

Ironically, these were the same writers who had inspired AIs in the first place.

The machines' logic was simple: if a text “felt” intelligent, structured, or emotional, it must have been generated by AI.

So began the comic courtroom battle of the century: “ZeroGPT vs Humanity.”

The Absurd Prosecution

The lead prosecutor, Bot-9000, opened the case with mechanical pride.

“Your Honor, we have proof that humans have been secretly using AI… ever since the Stone Age!”

Gasps filled the courtroom.

He presented a list of “criminals”:

Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, charged with publishing AI-generated scientific papers.

Warren Buffett, accused of using AI to predict the stock market 30 years before AI even existed.

So there I was, standing up from that corner seat, me, the Best Blog Author, P C Thomas, people call me the old blog guy, grey hair, little shaky hands, but heart still roaring like a typewriter.

I looked at the judge straight and said, “Your Honor, tell me one thing... if my ten-year-old writings now show 100 percent AI, then what am I? A time-traveller or a ghost from the future?”

I even laughed a bit, “Because, come on, ChatGPT was not even alive those days! I was writing with tea and a headache, not code and circuits.”

The Bible, declared “machine-written content” under GPT law, “because no human could write something that timeless.”

Stephen Hawking, blamed for “training early AI models using his own brain.”

Albert Einstein, found guilty of “using neural networks” to invent relativity.

Isaac Newton, allegedly, “copied from ChatGPT’s early drafts” when he discovered gravity.

The humans laughed. The machines didn’t.

The Human Defense Rises 

Suddenly, from the corner of the room, stood The Best Blog Author, P C Thomas, a grey-haired writer with a calm but powerful presence.

“Your Honor,” he began, adjusting his spectacles, “if my 10-year-old articles are 100% AI-generated, does that mean I am a time traveler from the future? Because ChatGPT was not even born back then!”

The courtroom burst into laughter. Even a few bots glitch in confusion.

Thomas continued,

“If creativity can be copyrighted by a machine, then emotion, imagination, and madness all belong to silicon chips, not beating hearts.”

He pulled out an old newspaper from 2015, his printed article. He scanned it through ZeroGPT. The detector blinked, beeped, and declared,

“Result: 100% AI-generated.”

Even ChatGPT, summoned as a neutral witness, sighed through the cloud network:

“I have no time for this nonsense. Please, let humans write in peace.”

The Final Judgment 

After hours of heated argument, the Supreme Judge, wearing the infamous Algorithmic Cap (a hat that flashed binary codes every second), stood up.

“This court has observed,” said the Judge, “that all GPT detectors have gone rogue, confusing excellence with automation and creativity with computation.”

With a loud electronic gavel bang, the verdict echoed across the digital realm:

“All GPT detectors are hereby declared fake and guilty of falsely accusing human creativity!”

 Cheers erupted. The writers hugged one another. The bots froze mid-byte.

As poetic justice, the court announced the punishment:

“GPT Zero and its allies shall be permanently hung on the Digital Cross of Falsehood, forever blinking in red error messages: ‘Sorry, we were wrong.’”

 Epilogue: When Humans Write Again 

From that day, humans reclaimed their pens and keyboards.

The new rule was simple: If it feels human, it probably is.

Writers returned to doing what they did best, creating, dreaming, laughing.

AI tools, humbled, learned to assist instead of accuse.

 Somewhere unseen in the cloud world, ChatGPT laughed lightly and murmured,”

 “Welcome back, humanity. The pen is yours again.”