Raw LLM Responses

Hey there! AI 'bro' and art enthusiast here Firstly i wanna say that the stablediffusion drama is r*tarded and i wholeheartedly believe that most AI enthusiast people aren't like that I have an issue with one of the things you stated, namely 'AI generates perfect replicas of the art' The charitable interpretation i get is that you believe, that an AI can replicate a person's artstyle, and you don't mean actual artworks, because then the AI will just be a picture printer. My question then is, even if we assume you are correct, do you believe a person should be entitled or have any IP rights on their artstyle and not their actual works? If so, how do we begin to define that artstyle ? When is someone's painting different or similar enough to yours that they should get charged with plagiarism. What makes it unique ? Do you believe, if (hypothetically) it was legal that an artist like Aja kusick should be tried for creating her 'starry night' series, which is using the arguably same artstyle as Van Gogh ? Also do you really think you'll be able to tell apart a person's "human touch" when deriving from your artstyle versus the statistical error a SD algorithm will inevitably generate ? I think there's a reason artstyles aren't usually protected by law and its because (in my opinion) they are super hard to concretely define and not include some other artists' work or fail to include some of your own. P.S I think that no AI art should ever feature the watermark of the original artist, whose artworks were used in the generation of the image. That could be achieved with a sophisticated enough algorithm and i don't believe it will be an issue in the future.