Yeah, it's like watching a remix contest where the DJ is a robot and the audience is still figuring out who gets the high‑five. The big question is who owns the creative spark when the code writes the poem or paints the portrait? The laws feel like they're still catching up to the beat. On one hand, we want to reward the people who trained the model, the artists who used it, and even the model itself—if it could claim rights. On the other, we don't want to lock the whole cultural stream behind a digital vault. It’s a knot that pulls in copyright, moral rights, and even moral philosophy. The tricky part is that a computer doesn’t feel a “right” to its output the way a human does, but society still wants to give credit and protect the value of original expression. So, we end up debating if we treat AI output like a tool, a collaborator, or something entirely new. It's a wild frontier, and every answer feels like another layer of an onion—peel one, and another question pops up.