Raw LLM Responses

If you play 5 seconds of a copyrighted song on YouTube - your video is gonna be demonetized. If you try to sell merch with a famous corporation's signature character, for example Mickey Mouse, you'd be sued. If you download a movie using pirate websites, you'd be fined (in many countries). But when it comes to independent artists - nobody cares. Social media apps exploit creators with "Terms and conditions" and "Privacy policies", that are giving them permission to use people's data however they want. And all artists can't just stop posting to social media, because for some of them it is the only way to showcase their artwork to the world and attract customers. Those "pro-AI" people don't care about the intellectual component of creating an artwork (the feelings, the story, the tiny details etc.). They don't know how much work, time and dedication it takes to create a good looking drawing in this oversaturated and highly competitive environment. I think "pro AI" people are those, who previously said, that "digital art is not art" and "your computer draws everything for you". The AI itself is not inherently bad. It is a good tool for recognizing patterns, it has already been used to synthesize a new form of protein and it can be widely used in the medical field. And I agree with you, that when it comes to art, the main problem with AI is that actual artists are getting exploited and their artworks are stolen. So I think first of all people should ask artists permission to use their artwork to train AI, and then artists should get a certain percentage of all the sales (around 90%, because an artist does the majority of work, and their number of commissions would be reduced, because AI art would be significantly cheaper and faster). But I don't really think there's much hope for justice for small artists. There needs to be a huge scandal with the participation of big corporations, for the government to finally close this grey area in the copyright law.