The issue circles back to their needing to be transparent about how they did the work.
When it comes to intellectual property there are two methods of protecting it: either you can keep it a trade secret and only use it in house (the secret sauce approach) or you keep things out in the open and seek copyright or patent or trademark protection. You can't have it both ways and even more so with AI co-created artifacts. If they are transparent about all the steps involved and what the humans did then they can seek protection for the human created parts. This also allows others to then replicate these steps and to create similar artifacts.
It sounds like they and many other "AI" teams want patent protection without having to register for it. These teams are trying to write their own licenses to rights they do not have.