 Generative AI systems don't just generate new content in abstraction, they can be tailored to generate content in the style of a specific person. You know, Drake, a musician, found that someone had trained an AI system to create Drake music. You can create new Beatles songs. You can write a poem like Maya Angelou. And you know, at this point, the ownership of a person over their creative process, over their intelligence, starts to get challenged by technology. And one way to think about this is what's the point of having intellectual property law, if it can't protect the most important intellectual property there is, your individual intelligence. At this point in time, we have to extend intellectual property law to protect not just individual creations, but an individual's process of creation itself. You can spend decades becoming really good at doing things in a specific way. And you have an incentive to do that because you own it and because you can enjoy the spoils, enjoy the returns from all of that investment. What's likely to happen is the US, the EU, or China, one of these three is likely to take a leadership role and define the first set of guidelines and laws around individuals' ownership of their creative process, around the use of data to train an AI system, around the ownership of things generated by something like chat GPT. And the other two entities will probably follow with some modifications.