I'm looking at this through the lens of US copyright, where the Copyright Office determined that AI output isn't protected by copyright, and thus isn't private

I'm looking at this through the lens of US copyright, where the Copyright Office determined that AI output isn't protected by copyright, and thus isn't private IP, as it isn't the creative output of a human being. If the results of inference and generation can't be protected under copyright, as they aren't the creative output of a human being, why wouldn't the results of back-propagation and gradient descent follow the same logic? This isn't about how we feel about it, it's a legal question.