Please cite a source that confirms your claim, rather than stating it as a fact without evidence. You may be right, but I have no way of confirming that given the content of your comment.
The report I’ve cited makes a compelling argument against your claim, and several prominent organization’s copyright policies align with it.
Your quote says “without any creative input or intervention from a human author”.
Just hitting a "Generate random artwork" button indeed certainly doesn't seem to qualify as "creative output or intervention", but as for how DALL-E and consorts currently work, I'd say that coming up with a suitable prompt text, potentially refining it to get the output closer to what you want, curating the output, maybe using one of the output pictures as input for further processing, etc. arguably all are at least some amount "creative input or intervention from a human author".
Is Dalle significantly different from Adobe Photoshop in the eyes of the law? In both cases you will use a software agent to create art. In fact CGI art has existed for decades. Surely this is a settled question
The report I’ve cited makes a compelling argument against your claim, and several prominent organization’s copyright policies align with it.