The issue with comments like this is that many people are talking about the law as it is, and others are approaching it from a moral/solution-based point of vie

The issue with comments like this is that many people are talking about the law as it is, and others are approaching it from a moral/solution-based point of view. Legally, AI is likely free and clear since the work it outputs is vastly different from any one art piece, therefore not being a derivative work of anything else (unless you tell it to copy an artists' style AND ask it specifically to remake an artists' existing work with the intent to recreate it). But morally, there are indeed externalities that can/should be thought of, and possible even put into law, but starting a discussion of this front is a losing game since everyone will have a different opinion on how much we should restrict, and whether it will even work (if you consider that China and Russia will forego any sort of copyright protection for AI generation, these laws could enable these countries to surpass the rest of the world in capability and quality). > edit