Artificial Intelligence is the creator of many things: texts, images, and music. Artificial Intelligence was trained on these same things created by humanity. The question arises, who is the author of works created on the basis of AI? The person who gave the original works or the artificial intelligence that learned from them and began to create things based on them (Deckker et al., 2025).

The main principle behind rapid learning and operation of neural networks is the imitation of the human brain: by analysing a huge number of works from various fields of art, they identify certain patterns and use them as a basis for creating new combinations (Deckker et al., 2025). Artistic, musical, and literary creations emerge from generative models like GAN (Generative Adversarial Network), in which two algorithms work simultaneously: the first is responsible for generating the result, and the other recognizes and evaluates it, rejecting unsuccessful options until something resembling a real work is created.

On the one hand, some people believe that AI threatens human creativity, reducing art to calculation, excluding emotions and the meaning of art. But on the other hand, others see it as an ally that frees people from routine and allows them to focus on ideas and improve their work and skills. AI is proposed to be considered as an assistant, which helps artists generate new artistic possibilities, offering alternative perspectives, and automating routine tasks (Perić et al., 2025).

A key question today is who should own works created by artificial intelligence: the developer, the user, or the system itself? And here the law is still unambiguous in only one thing: only a human can be the author.  In addition, most algorithms are trained on already existing human works, vast amounts of which are used without the consent of their creators. This gives rise to serious debates – whether such a practice constitutes a form of plagiarism and how fair it is to speak of the “creativity” of artificial intelligence if it grows from works already created by others, especially when it is accused of unethical data extraction. True art is about expressing emotion, conveying meaning, and trying to leave a mark. Artificial intelligence can only imitate emotion from other works, but it can never put its own meaning into them. Only human consciousness can do that. Artificial intelligence tries to create something perfect, but perfection lies in imperfection (Deckker et al., 2025). As philosopher Michael Sandel notes, part of what gives art and athletic achievement their power is the process of observing the manifestation of natural gifts. People enjoy and celebrate this talent because it is, in essence, a model of human achievement – a combination of talent, work, and human gifts.

All things considered, although artificial intelligence in the creative field has opened up new opportunities, at the same time it has created difficult legal and, especially, moral questions. And even despite its ability to generate texts, music, and paintings, it still remains merely an imitation of art in this world, without any sense of creation, intention, or personal vision. Therefore, a machine will never replace a real artist, but AI-human cooperation must reach standardization levels to make sure AI devices augment rather than diminish artistic quality in coming years.

References:

1. Deckker, D., & Sumanasekara, S. (2025). A review of AI-powered creativity: The intersection of AI and the arts. International Journal of Global Economic Light, 10–24. https://doi.org/10.36713/epra20968
2. Perić, N., Milovanović, M., & Čudić, F. (2025). From algorithm to aesthetics: Artificial intelligence’s place in the creative sector. EMC Review – Časopis za ekonomiju – APEIRON, 29(2). https://doi.org/10.7251/emc250v130p