Yes, I have been playing with AI in Python lately. Do you mean to whom AI-generated images legally belong to? Perhaps the dilemma here is not to whom it belongs to, but instead who is the rightful "author"? It takes a lot of time and effort to develop the skills to create paintings and sculptures, be them digitally or in the real world, but AI makes images out of text descriptions anybody can type.
It's a new kind of art creation that requires no skills that need to be developed. Since AI is trained with a large quantity of art created by real people, it basically steals the skills from the actual authors when creating new pieces based on their work. For example, the images above required training a GAN model using thousands of H R Giger paintings. If someone wanted AI to create "Ken1171" renders, it would need thousands of my renders to train yet another GAN model to feed the AI with.
In a related subject, some Hollywood actors, like Mark Hamill, has sold the rights to his likeness to allow Disney to create 3D versions of him in movies where he will not even participate. They have his permission to do it. When it comes to AI images, similar permissions might be required if the source material artist is still alive.