The copyright protected material isn't in the model. This can be figured out easily because, if they did, the models are so much smaller than the input data tha

The copyright protected material isn't in the model. This can be figured out easily because, if they did, the models are so much smaller than the input data that it'd be literal unobtanium for compression algorithms. Copyright also has nothing to do with the tool. What a piece depicts and how it is used are much more important than how a piece was created. If I paint a picture by hand of a particular scene from a Disney movie, that's clearly a derived work and may be subject to copyright protection (it depends, there could be a fair use argument in specific situations, so even "it's copyright!" is not a cut-and-dried argument). If I paint a picture of Hercules in the style of Disney, that's trademark violation. But I can paint Hercules in any other style and Disney can't say shit (though they certainly try). This is an age-old argument. Some artists think they should have a monopoly on certain ideas. As a society, we've already said no, you only get to own your expression of your ideas. And as ideas go, "like a trending artist on ArtStation" isn't a particularly strong one.