This post marks my first “sponsorship,” though not in the traditional sense.

I’m now a Perplexity Ambassador for their new AI browser, Comet. It’s not a paid arrangement — just a collaboration with a platform I genuinely use and believe in. Still, it’s technically an advertisement.

Also — none of this is legal or financial advice.

I’m still a law student. I don’t bill hours (yet). I just write things and hope they make smart people think twice before scrolling past.

Most people think AI creates art out of nothing.

The truth is simpler — and far more interesting: AI amplifies what you feed it.

When I create AI artwork, I don’t start from randomness. I start from something human — a photo I’ve taken, a scene I’ve imagined, a color palette that already works. Then I guide the model. I refine, layer, and adjust until it reflects what I saw in my head.

The result isn’t “AI art.” It’s AI-assisted vision — the fusion of human intent and machine precision.

And that same logic now applies to the broader question of intellectual property:

AI isn’t erasing human creativity. It’s changing how we express and own it.

The 20th century rewarded discovery — finding oil, data, or loopholes.

The 21st rewards creation — designing something new from what’s already there.

Generative AI accelerates this shift.

It lets us explore thousands of creative possibilities in seconds — but the differentiator is still the person behind the keyboard.

When I work with AI, I’m not outsourcing creativity. I’m extending it.

Every decision — the base photo, the lighting, the tone, even what I don’t include — is a form of authorship. The AI doesn’t invent that. It amplifies it.

This is where ownership begins: the human spark still defines what’s protectable.

The law hasn’t caught up yet.

As of 2025, U.S. copyright law still requires a human author to claim protection. Works created entirely by AI are not copyrightable, as discussed in JURIST’s explainer on AI authorship.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Copyright Office’s recent report warns that AI training on copyrighted works may not fit neatly within fair use. The line between innovation and infringement is still blurry.

But that uncertainty isn’t just risk — it’s opportunity.

Because the law still recognizes human creativity as the anchor of ownership.

If you can show deliberate creative input — through prompt design, iteration, and curation — your work remains yours.

Think of it this way:

If AI is the orchestra, the human is still the conductor. And nobody sues the trumpet.

Prompting isn’t typing.

It’s composition. It’s design. It’s authorship.

When I create an image, I’m making dozens of deliberate choices:

Each of those decisions shapes the final output — and each reflects human intent.

Creators who start documenting their process — prompt logs, base files, version histories — will have stronger claims to authorship.

Because in the end, the prompt is a brushstroke.

The takeaway: It’s not the AI that creates value; it’s the person who knows how to ask the right question.

As mentioned above, this article is partially supported by my first “sponsor” — sort of.

I’m now a Perplexity Ambassador for their new AI browser, Comet.

It’s not a traditional sponsorship.

It’s a collaboration with a product I already use — a browser that thinks more like a research partner than a search bar.

And it’s fascinating how browsers like Comet, Atlas, Gemini, and Dia are quietly changing how we interact with information.

They’re not just gateways to the web; they’re intelligent interfaces that interpret, remember, and contextualize.

For decades, browsers were passive. They displayed what you asked for.

AI browsers engage with you — they summarize, reason, and even infer your intent.

When I use Comet, I’m not searching. I’m conversing.

That shift — from static lookup to dynamic dialogue — is reshaping how we think, learn, and create.

So yes, this is technically an ad.

But it’s also a belief: The tools we use to see the world shape what we’re capable of making in it.

If you want to see what I mean, you can try it yourself — sign up here to get a full year of Comet free.

It’s easy to think Apple fell behind in the AI race.

But recent moves suggest they were quietly setting the stage.

According to The Wall Street Journal, iPhone sales just hit new records — a sign that Apple’s ecosystem still runs on gravitational pull.

The question is: how many of those buyers upgraded to Apple Intelligence-capable devices?

If this wave of upgrades represents users moving onto AI-ready hardware, Apple may have quietly positioned itself for the next decade of contextual, on-device intelligence.

Their approach mirrors their broader philosophy:

Don’t be first — be inevitable.

Apple’s on-device AI doesn’t chase headlines; it builds trust.

Privacy, precision, and performance — the Apple trinity.

And as my brother (who works for Verizon) tells me, they can’t keep the orange iPhone 17 Pros in stock. Apparently, nothing says “future of intelligence” like a phone that matches your Aperol Spritz.

In sum — AI doesn’t create beauty out of nothing.

It amplifies what’s already beautiful.

The same is true for intellectual property:

It starts with human spark — the person who chooses, refines, and imagines.

If you’re deliberate in how you use AI — if you document your role, stay creative, and keep ownership at the center — you’re not just adapting to a new era.

You’re defining it.

The next decade will belong to creators who know how to merge their vision with intelligent tools.

Not the ones who generate the most content — but the ones who generate meaning.

Because in the end, it’s still the eye behind the prompt that matters.