Raw LLM Responses

I completely understand the frustration of spending years learning to draw and paint, only to see an AI use your work to enable anyone to create similar works much more easily. However, I am an artist myself, and I still don't see why it would be considered a copyright infringement. The argument you're making is absurd. While an AI might perfectly copy an artwork, a highly skilled human could almost do the same. The only difference lies in the ease with which the AI accomplishes it. Moreover, if you copy an artist's work without giving credit or sell the artwork, then you are engaging in copyright infringement, regardless of the tools you used. The same applies if you simply replicate another artist's style – the problem lies with the person, not the tool. If ever I understand how it truly constitutes copyright infringement, I will be happy to join your cause. However, it seems like history is repeating itself, as the arguments used against AI are the same as those used against digital art. Thankfully, there are artists who are not entirely against AI, but I believe many artists against copyright infringement are also against AI. In conclusion, it is necessary to educate people to be original, to respect copyright, and to make better use of the tools available to them. Now, if someone has an argument that could make me change my mind, I am completely open.