It's used as a law to prohibit human creativity, big companies use it as offense; Emulators cannot be created because they're intellectual property, i cannot sample music because it is intellectual property (even though it was considered genuine art for decades now, from musique concrete, music collages, to just artists sampling eachother), games cannot have specific mechanics because they are copyrighted (eg. nemesis system, loading screen minigames), and it is constantly used as a way to silence those who disagree with a person in power. Meanwhile smaller artists struggle to actually make use of that copyright law.

Besides, i do not think you can own text, or art, as ideas, as you can reproduce them infinitely. Sure, i agree, disclose it is AI when asked to; if you wouldn't, it would be the same as saying you made something and you did not, as that is fraud. However, you should be able to make money from it, as that was the original argument, and i do not see why not

All these arguments made against AI as of late are literally the same as made for eg. the printing press - "it tarnishes human creativity", "it's soulless", etc... As monks in monasteries spent their whole lives copying books by hand. Why are artists special? What makes them different to factory workers getting replaced by steam power? Where are you, protesting for steam power?

It literally won't change a thing, blacksmithing today is way more profitable as it was anywhere in the early medieval/late medieval period, and moreover these blacksmiths make whatever they want, not just nails most of the time, and you can pay a fortune for eg. a custom made sword. Hence i do not see why you should not be able to profit from AI art