AI-generated art cannot be copyrighted, rules a US Federal Judge

Wow. According to the article the US copyright office refused to issue "copyright to Stephen Thaler for an AI-generated image made with the Creativity Machine algorithm he’d created." Doesn't this strike you as nonsense? Consider that one can make a chisel and use that chisel to create works that can be copyrighted. But apparently one cannot write a program that will be used to crate copyrighted work? How do you even draw a clear line between "AI" and "not AI" considering that the term AI is very loosely defined?

Easy work around --- claim human authorship by the "owner" of the work. AI was simply his/her tool.

This appears to be a self made problem brought about by attempting to deny human input or incentive or control that lead to the creation of the work.

Did the AI decide on it's own to create the work? Did it do so without any training? I don't think so --- consequently, AI doesn't "own" the work and can't legally be considered it's "author".