Understand that AI procedures may fall under certain laws governing transformative and fair use

Understand that AI procedures may fall under certain laws governing transformative and fair use. When you post content online, you accept the platform's terms of service, which often include consent for others to engage with and potentially be inspired by your artwork. Technically, you own the individual piece, not the artistic style itself – copyright laws can't protect an aesthetic from being replicated. Unless a work is a direct or nearly exact copy or collage, it's unlikely to be copyright infringement – even collages can be considered transformative if they convey a distinctly new meaning, as seen in cases like those of Jeff Koons and Richard Prince.

If companies lose copyright infringement lawsuits stemming from AI, we risk losing the very principles that protect access to fair use and public domain works. Inspiration is fundamental to the creative process; the same could be said for AI development.

It's counterproductive to tell people not to copy your style. We learn by replicating before developing our unique approaches. AI operates differently, but it shouldn't be demonized because its output threatens some artists. We should focus not on the tool, but on those who might use it unethically.

Those who claim AI "steals" should consider the evidence. Midjourney, for example, doesn't store and regurgitate images. It translates art into mathematical equations, then creates new compositions based on prompts. In a way, this mirrors the human creative process. If AI is a thief, then it's an exceptional artist (after all, Picasso said, "Good artists copy, great artists steal"!). All artists draw inspiration and build upon what came before.

Art requires visual input. Without exposure, creation is nearly impossible. AI operates similarly, synthesizing data to produce original work. Yes, this differs from tracing or direct referencing, but it can lead to unique and compelling results. If you doubt AI's ability to synthesize, consider this: it can generate images resembling a face, capturing essential features while exceeding the realism of the reference photo. This suggests AI is capable of original work, making accusations of "stealing" less valid.

Perhaps the real issue is competition. If so, the solution is to strengthen your storytelling skills, not condemn new forms of creativity.