Raw LLM Responses

This needs to be discussed. I'm a multi-platinum songwriter/producer, and I've been in the music industry for over 35 years. So, I have an advantage over people that are giving a basic prompt to generate a complete song. Me on the other hand have been writing songs for decades and my knowledge allows me to give very specific information about what I want to happen. I mean very detailed. If it's not giving me the output I want, then my experience and knowledge allows me to say it in another way until the desired output is achieved. From my perspective, what I'm doing with my prompts is no different than what I do with humans in the studio. Absolutely no difference. So, what needs to happen moving forward, is that the copyright process needs to evolve by adding a legal step to the process that entails providing the actual actual prompt input used and any supporting data that created the output. This information required should be of an electronic nature and should be provided by the Copyright Office. So, when a legal challenge arises, legal results are being made; not on time, date and so forth alone, but the factual engineered prompt as well. This will work because very specific algorithms are being used and has measurable calculations. Now a judge and jury have enough information to make a sound decision. I'm working with ASCAP right now to bring my perspective to legal light. Your thoughts please.