Raw LLM Responses

Remember that classical artist sav digital art as an threat and not real art, that digital artist could mass-produce art and sell cheap prints so artist that worked with painting and sold "real" art should lose their job. Not long before that artist also saw photography as a threat, and before that radio was a threat to the musicians and so was the record player seren in the past, as a threath to the culture of folk music and folk that played instruments. Ever new technology is seen as a threat to the older generation and those who work with the older technology, but art do not die and artist is no going away, it will just be easier for folk to create the art they want, but there will be new artist that getting professional by use AI, but folk still want that old classical art made with oil, the rule have always been adept or change, artist have always had the feeling that art was hard and threatened by the whole world, it is so like if you once called yourself "Artist" you can not take another job or change how you create art. And AI do not infringe on Copyright, it is the same as you look in a magazine and see a photo that give you inspiration, you paint something that look like that but is far from a copy and it is made in a different artform, that is not copyright infringement, AI work in the same way, it look at images, try to identify pattern and shapes so it can be connected to a word, then the computer use algorithm based on how a brain work to create images, the image the AI make will not look like existing art. On the other hand can not AI art be copyrighted, for copyright need an artistic touch and creativity, that is why fractals can not be copytighted, not even the song "Happy Birthday to you" could be copyrighted even a company claimed so for several years, so AI artists may be without protection unless they can prove they did more than just tupe some words to create the "art".