By your argument, since an encyclopedia is not a person, I can copy it with impunity. It's a collection of work built on others' ideas and research, but technically a tool to bring it together. I can assure you that virtually any school would consider the direct use of it, without citation, plagiarism.

Let's assume I used an encyclopedia outside of my native tongue. I took the passage verbatim, used a tool to translate it to my native tongue, and passed it off as my own. The translation tool is clearly not a person, and I've even transformed the original work. I might escape detection, but this is still plagiarism.

Do you not agree?

Let's go to how Cambridge University defines it academically:

> Plagiarism is defined as the unacknowledged use of the work of others as if this were your own original work.

> A student may be found guilty of an act of plagiarism irrespective of intent to deceive.

And let's go to their specific citation for the use of AI in research:

> AI does not meet the Cambridge requirements for authorship, given the need for accountability. AI and LLM tools may not be listed as an author on any scholarly work published by Cambridge