> "An AI", being a person, should be considered the author of its output. I guess "copyright holder" is a better term. I can think of Music records, or Hollyw

> "An AI", being a person, should be considered the author of its output. I guess "copyright holder" is a better term. I can think of Music records, or Hollywood companies, which are not human but are definitely "persons" that hold tons of copyrighted material, and even some of those created that material. I can't see why not a program that creates digital works couldn't hold the copyright of its output