The most important document a creative had, up until today, was their portfolio -- typically, a look-book of finished pieces.
Now, that portfolio needs to include, for every piece, proof-of-work -- snapshots of the whatever-it-is in various states along the road to completion, in sufficient quantity to dissuade any legal claim that the work was AI-produced.
At the limit, those aim to sell organic-certified free range content will want to surveil themselves during the entire creative process, and associate that recording indelibly with the created work.
That's a whole lot of extra work and a whole lot of extra privacy violation, but the alternative will be to devalue one's own work: for to the extent to which it may have been produced by AI, it will be a liability to downstream consumers.
For example, a film director might commission a score from a composer, but unless that score comes with timestamped, SHAsummed video of enough of the composition process to preclude invalidating the broader claim to a copyright (and thus salable work), that composition becomes a financial risk for the director.
The consequences of not doing so are severe: At minimum, if the score cannot be copyrighted, then it can be borrowed, free-of-charge, by another film director, and at maximum, the spectre of AI contribution might virally taint the entire film (IANAL; am I getting this right?)
"Creative" just became the most surveilled job on the planet.
We also may have just found the first agreeable use for blockchain -- an indelible public record of organic artistic creation, bearing SHAsums associated recorded twitch and youtube streams (along with logs of workstation network traffic) permanently with the finished work.
Wouldn't it be hilarious if AI copyright law saved crypto?