Raw LLM Responses

I agree with and support all your claims, while I will never support any theft or copyright infringement of any artists work, I unfortunately see a loophole in Deviant Arts policies. No person can infringe copyright, what about a computer doing it? Weeeellll you say a person has to turn the computer (A.I Art..fill in the blank) on, and then tell it what to do. Yes, and there in lies the loophole. A person may not do it themselves (steal, infringe) but there's no stipulation of having a person tell a computer to do it. The program isn't re-posting the art or claiming it as its own work, its using the work to learn how to make something similar to it in the future. So technically and unfortunately, it's not really an infringement, its no different than any artist looking at another artists work on a screen or even from a book, to study it and try to draw something like it. In a rough around the edges comparison; in music its called a cover version of someone's copyrighted song in a barband's performance. I seriously doubt that Deviant proceeded with this, without having their lawyers advise them what they can legally do, and unfortunately as I have shown, they haven't violated their own rules. I can see the following that's right around the corner; society treating computers (A.I programs) as actual people, and no I don't like it, (until I think of that Star Trek NG is Data a person or computer episode) If they do, re-defining our copyright laws to reflect their inclusion into society, will undoubtedly result in a second class citizen status, rules for thee, not for us. A generic 'tho shalt not copy or learn from each others work' rule, will mean we can never use another artists work to just observe and learn from, or risk fines and such (how the heck would that even be enforceable anyway? Think the barband example.) So, how does the Deviant community feel? Whats the solution?