> "the AI did this picture, so we don't have to pay you." If the court rulings hold and AI works cannot be copyrighted then us end users do not have to pay for

> "the AI did this picture, so we don't have to pay you." If the court rulings hold and AI works cannot be copyrighted then us end users do not have to pay for it either... but that seems like a race to the bottom. Like the end of a craft. Why would anyone create art if it has no/minimal downstream value? Artists need to band together in some sort of union or not agree to do art with that AI clause or perhaps only do art with a no-AI use clause. And have an allowed AI-clause that is prohibitively expensive (like in the multi hundred millions per piece). That way 'accidents that happen' have a prescribed recovery amount plus other requirements like pulling the generated artwork. "Hey, we understand it may have been accidental, but here is the bill."