Lots of artists can reproduce existing content, should we get rid of them entirely, or just restrict them from publishing such content? If anything, it's the responsibility of the publisher to avoid copyright infringement.

> Also, personally I have no interest in a service that generates a song for you because it takes away all the fun. Maybe something that helps to find mistakes in composed music and help learning would be much more useful.

You are not forced to use the full raw output, you could use it sparingly in your new composition, the same way you might use ChatGPT to improve your lyrics.

All non-musician friends where thrilled to generate music. It's already extremely fun and will keep getting better. I think it lowers the barrier of entry and will increase the total amount of performers, the "real" musicians. I am sure musicians playing instruments back in the days had the same idea about digital music: "Not playing with the physical instruments takes away all the fun. You can't touch, smell, feel it. It has a negative impact on the music and on the people. I am so smart, I am a democrat, you guys are nazis, you want to destroy humanity while I want to restrict the majority of the people from having fun.".

> lot of effort and money to produce Mathematical formulas too, and you can't copyright them.

If a new device is invented to replay memory "almost verbatim (but in lower quality) for example". Should its use be restricted with regard to copyrighted content? It's your memory, your unique interpretation, shouldn't it belong to you?

AI will get better and you'll be able to easily go up the tree from which content was derived (intentionally or not) based on the similarity and the publication date.

Artists don't need more protections than mathematicians.