> The courts however, have consistently ruled against AI-generated content.
No, they haven't consistently “ruled against AI generated content”.
In fact, very few cases involving AI generated content or generative AI systems have made it past preliminary stages, and the rulings that have been reached, preliminary and otherwise, are a mixed bag. Unless you are talking specifically about copyrightability of pure AI content, which is really a pretty peripheral issue.
> It's really only a matter of time until either the bubble bursts, or legislation happens that pops the bubble.
The bubble bursting, as it is certain to do and probably fairly soon, won’t have any significant impact on the trend of AI use, just as the dotcom bubble bursting didn’t on internet use, it will just represent the investment situation reflecting rather than outpacing the reality.
And if you are focusing on an area where, as you say, courts are consistently ruling against AI content, legislation is unlikely to make that worse (but quite plausibly could make it better) for AI.
No, they haven't consistently “ruled against AI generated content”.
In fact, very few cases involving AI generated content or generative AI systems have made it past preliminary stages, and the rulings that have been reached, preliminary and otherwise, are a mixed bag. Unless you are talking specifically about copyrightability of pure AI content, which is really a pretty peripheral issue.
> It's really only a matter of time until either the bubble bursts, or legislation happens that pops the bubble.
The bubble bursting, as it is certain to do and probably fairly soon, won’t have any significant impact on the trend of AI use, just as the dotcom bubble bursting didn’t on internet use, it will just represent the investment situation reflecting rather than outpacing the reality.
And if you are focusing on an area where, as you say, courts are consistently ruling against AI content, legislation is unlikely to make that worse (but quite plausibly could make it better) for AI.