An interesting read with good points regarding copyright discussions and how pointy haired bosses will hope to do a neo nafta to white collar employees like the original did to blue collar ones.

I suspect businesses will attempt to do compilation copyright if not individual asset copyright to get around tfas recipe for centaurness for artists.

If I have a story that I write and use AI to render the images, soundtrack, motions, potentially voice acting, when does what the AI did stop and where does my work begin?

If I write and voice act the thing, those pieces are copyrighted. Does that constitute enough of the creative work that while I can't copyright a particular screen grab, I can copyright the work as a whole like a phone book?

Maybe, I genuinely don't know. What if I have the AI do the voice acting as well? Probably, that is a public domain work to my uninformed opinion.

It is not a question in my mind if I also just throw in a concept and have the AI produce the script that is then rendered out as well.

AI has shown that for creative art, it all begins with the writing, even if the final work produced is entirely visual or audio, the whole point of Art and copyright is to create a shared impression, hallucination, experience from Human to human. To communicate.

If the AI rendering can properly give things like tabletop RPG Recaps (and the content that the AI is rendering is original and under copyright) how much of that original concept (such as someone playing a tabletop RPG session with a story they wrote themselves) does the final rendered work get transient copyright protection? None? Even though its based on an underlying concept that is copyrightable if written down?

Businesses will be wanting to know these sorts of questions too, and that sill help shape how artists / coders / knowledge workers at large are transformed into centaurs or the reverse, ceteris paribus.