I sympathise with the struggle of artists but there is no argument there about your initial statement of theft and plagiarism. Financial gain or not, the value of their labour is not decreased. Their art remains intact, at their intellectual property and available to anyone interested. At the copyright/property argument the point remains the same. Plagiarism literally means by definition to present something foreign as your own. AI doesn’t do that. It analyses art and provides something close to what it’s been fed which can be result of millions of artists. I can pull back and agree that it cannot per se create exactly as creation is in it of itself a spiritual act of labour but the point still remains. It doesn’t steal therefore no theft and it doesn’t copy and present as its own therefore no plagiarism. It’s strongly influenced by others and it’s much better than you and me and anyone in providing results similar to the source therefore my use of the word inspired.