We can copyright an output, not a style.
Through their talent and skill, artists of all kinds have pioeneered methods of communication. Writing, carving, painting, and any form of art, is a method of communication.
These can be 'passed' to a machine, to allow someone without that skill to being to communice as well.
Naturally, someone commissioning a machine is like an Art Director, not an artist. But it is still a valid collaboration, helpful for the bottom of the market where real artists cannot be afforded.
We all can't wait for the the stupid use of generative AI art, where people deliberately try to profit off of copyrighted IP, or the unending slopshipping, to be cleared out of the culture.
Good people with good ideas to share are sidelined, shut down, and ignored. They have stories, proposals, projects they've mulled on for years. But they have been hamstrung from age, trauma, life conditions, and endless reasons.
I accept that how AI was scraped and handled was done badly, but we can't put that genie back in the bottle. It's here to stay, like it or not. Now it's about what you do with it.