The problem is that this is not a question that a court would ask about these tools and since copyright is a legal invention it is kind of pointless.
It’s the kind of conversation to have in the context of art (better yet if your contribution to the conversation is art itself) or the philosophy of language, although the question could be a little less “stoned in a Freshman dorm” and more informed by the actual discourse of those specialties as these questions are sort of old hat.
If you want to ask meaningful questions of these tools and copyright you need to study the law, plain and simple.
It’s the kind of conversation to have in the context of art (better yet if your contribution to the conversation is art itself) or the philosophy of language, although the question could be a little less “stoned in a Freshman dorm” and more informed by the actual discourse of those specialties as these questions are sort of old hat.
If you want to ask meaningful questions of these tools and copyright you need to study the law, plain and simple.