Raw LLM Responses

Unfortunately, I think you are arguing the wrong point here. AI art is real art because the definition for that is that it is something presented to an audience for appreciation. It’s got nothing to do with how it’s made, it never has, it’s always about the human intention/choices made. So even just the choice of writing the prompt would classify that as art. Simplicity/effort has also never been the test for classifying something as art. I think what you are/should be arguing is that you don’t like the policy around AI art because it harms artists, not that it isn’t art… As long as a human curates and presents something, that is by definition art. I don’t think we should say AI art is not art just because it uses a different tool or amount of effort, both are irrelevant to deciding what is considered art. That just leads to bigotry. Copyright is a bit more complicated and I think there’s a bit to debate here (with AI) but current standing is that copyright does not protect style or ideas. So unless the AI is reproducing specific works, it’s technically just creating works “in the style of” the training data. It’s an unprecedented situation that copyright is not prepared to handle. I think this is something for the courts to figure out, but the acquisition portion mentioned here (AI companies pirating tons of source material) IS illegal.