AI, Clarified

What actually works, what doesn't, and what's next for your business.

Jun 17, 2025

"Clarity is the antidote to fear. When it comes to AI, understanding what's real is the first step to progress."— Nadina D. Lisbon

Hello Sip Savants! 👋🏾

It’s easy to get lost in the AI hype cycle. Every day there's a new tool or a new headline that's either utopian or apocalyptic. Let’s cut through the noise. To make smart decisions, we need to understand what's happening on the ground right now. From the creative departments of major ad agencies to the courtrooms defining our digital future, AI is already making its mark. Here’s a clear look at what's working, what's being debated, and what it means for you.

3 Tech Bites

⚡️ What Works: AI as Creative Fuel
- In the high-pressure world of advertising, AI is already proving its worth as a creative partner. Agencies are using AI tools to brainstorm campaign ideas, generate copy, and produce concept art in a fraction of the time. This isn't replacing human creatives; it's supercharging them, allowing them to focus on strategy and refinement ¹.
⚖️ What's Next: The Battle for a Digital Rulebook
- A major lawsuit is currently unfolding with creative giants like Disney taking on the AI image generator Midjourney ². The central question: can an AI be trained on copyrighted material without permission? The outcome of this case will have massive implications, helping to write the rulebook for intellectual property in the age of AI.
🤖 What Matters: The Human in the Loop
- Between the creative explosion in advertising and the legal debates over copyright, one thing is clear: the most important role is that of the human director. Whether it's a creative director choosing the best AI-generated concept or a judge interpreting century-old copyright law for the digital age, human judgment remains the critical component.

5-Minute Strategy

🧠 'Good Use Case' Test

Not every creative task is a good fit for AI. Before you dive in, use this quick test to see if AI can be a true partner, or just a distraction. Run your task through these three questions:

Does it require volume or variety?
- AI excels at generating options. It's brilliant for tasks like "draft 50 social media headlines" or "create 10 variations of a logo concept." If you need scale, AI is a powerful ally.
Is its main value in overcoming the 'blank page'?
- AI is a fantastic starting point. Use it to generate a first draft of a blog post, a basic structure for a presentation, or initial visual concepts. If the goal is to get momentum and have something to react to, it's a perfect use case.
Is the final judgment call uniquely human?
- Does the task ultimately require taste, strategic alignment, brand knowledge, or emotional intelligence to make the final choice? This is the human's most valuable role: the curator, editor, and director.

If you answered "yes" to at least two, you have a strong candidate for a successful human-AI partnership.

1 Big Idea

💡 Redefining Ownership in the Age of AI

The clash between generative AI and copyright law, highlighted by landmark cases like the one involving Disney and Midjourney, is more than just a legal skirmish; it's the start of a fundamental re-evaluation of what authorship means. Our entire system of intellectual property is built on a foundation of human creation—an individual or group pouring their unique skill and labor into a work. Generative AI challenges this by creating a new paradigm where a single prompt can yield a complex work built upon the patterns of millions of pre-existing, human-made pieces of data.

This immediately complicates the question of ownership. If you use an AI to create a stunning image, who is the true author? Is it you, for writing the prompt? Is it the AI company, for building the model? Or is it the countless original artists, photographers, and writers whose work was used to train the AI, often without their knowledge or consent? Each party has a legitimate claim to have provided a crucial ingredient, yet our current laws are ill-equipped to assign credit or compensation to such a distributed, layered act of creation.

As we navigate this uncharted territory, several potential paths are emerging. One solution might involve a compulsory licensing system, similar to how radio stations pay royalties to play music. AI companies could pay into a collective fund that compensates creators whose work is part of the training data. Another, more radical idea, is that AI-assisted works cannot be copyrighted at all and fall into the public domain. A middle ground is developing through technology itself, with proposals for robust data watermarking that would allow for creator attribution and the choice to opt out of training sets entirely.

Beyond the legal frameworks, this debate forces us to consider the changing value of human creativity. If AI can instantly generate a thousand technically proficient images, does that devalue the skill of a human illustrator? Perhaps. But it could also dramatically increase the value of uniquely human skills: taste, curation, storytelling, and strategic vision. The creative professional of the future may be less of a pure hands-on maker and more of a "creative director," whose primary skill is guiding powerful tools to achieve a specific, emotionally resonant goal that only they can envision.

Ultimately, we are not just patching old laws; we are being called upon to design a new social contract for creativity in the 21st century. This requires active and open collaboration between technologists who build the models, the artists who fuel them, and the policymakers who must regulate them. The goal is not to stifle innovation, but to ensure that as our tools become exponentially more powerful, we build a system that continues to respect, protect, and reward the human ingenuity at the heart of it all.

TechSips with Nadina: The Newsletter

Discussion about this post