In a single, provocative statement, Elon Musk sparked a controversy that threatens to undermine the very essence of the creative industry: “I agree.” This response—direct, assertive, and profoundly impactful—was made to Jack Dorsey’s notorious suggestion to “delete all IP law.” However, it was more than just a casual late-night comment; it represented a clear declaration of intent, perceived by artists, musicians, filmmakers, writers, and advocates for creative rights worldwide as a direct attack. Within hours, social media erupted with hashtags such as #BoycottMusk and #SendMuskToMars, calling for the expulsion of the Tesla and X CEO from the planet: “Gã điên này nên cút về sao Hỏa”—This madman should return to Mars.
Elon Musk, who is no stranger to controversy, has now ventured into perilous territory by challenging the very foundation of human culture. Intellectual Property laws, which serve as the cornerstone of creative ownership and economic equity, are not mere legal formalities; they are essential for millions who shape their lives and identities around original creations. Musk, alongside his tech elite counterpart Jack Dorsey, has deemed these essential protections obsolete.
The timing of this declaration is particularly precarious. The AI revolution is rapidly advancing, and beneath its appealing surface lies a harsh reality: the creative sector is being exploited by machines, while its defenders are being told that their rights should be eliminated entirely. On the same day Musk endorsed Dorsey’s proposal to dismantle IP law, TED’s Chris Anderson challenged OpenAI CEO Sam Altman with a striking visual: an AI-generated Charlie Brown comic strip that clearly exhibited signs of intellectual property infringement. Altman’s reply? A vague contemplation about the necessity for a “new model” of creative economics.
For the artists who dedicate their lives to their craft, these overtures from the tech industry feel less like innovation and more akin to theft. The backlash was immediate and overwhelming. More than 50,000 artists, including renowned figures like Thom Yorke, James Patterson, and Julianne Moore, signed an open letter denouncing the unlicensed use of their work.The situation intensified when iconic personalities such as Ron Howard, Paul McCartney, and Cynthia Erivo expressed their outrage directly to the White House. Their unified message was unmistakable: this is not a matter of innovation; it is theft. Nevertheless, Musk, exhibiting his characteristic bravado, remained defiant. To him, regulations are merely suggestions, boundaries are obstacles to overcome, and criticism is nothing more than background noise. Now, having fallen out of favor with governments, labor unions, and the scientific community due to Neuralink and SpaceX’s aspirations for Mars, he has succeeded in alienating a group he once professed to champion—artists.
From Los Angeles to Berlin, and from Seoul to Buenos Aires, creatives have taken to the internet to voice their anger. Visual artists have shared digital pieces depicting Musk with a censor bar across his mouth. Musicians have produced parody songs with lyrics that critique the exploitation of AI. Dancers have crafted performances that symbolize their erasure by algorithms. Even fashion designers have participated in the protest, showcasing AI-themed collections on runways adorned with phrases like “Musk Stole My Soul” and “Copyright is Not Dead.”
Equally critical were the remarks from Ed Newton-Rex, CEO of Fairly Trained, who accused technology leaders of conducting an “all-out war on creators.” The implication is clear: these tech giants are not just apathetic towards creators; they are actively taking advantage of them under the pretense of “progress.” The hypocrisy did not escape notice, as social media erupted with reminders that individuals like Dorsey and Musk amassed their fortunes thanks to intellectual property protections.
“Everyone turns into a free-market libertarian once they strike it rich,” one viral post noted. In essence, these tech moguls utilized the system to accumulate wealth, only to dismantle the very framework that supported their success once their financial security was assured. The audacity of Musk’s support for the elimination of intellectual property rights is further underscored by the ongoing copyright disputes surrounding AI. Companies such as OpenAI and Google are currently lobbying the U.S. government for extensive exemptions that would permit AI systems to learn from films, literature, and music without obtaining permission or providing compensation. They contend thatTo creators, this argument is not only absurd but also deeply offensive. National security? Who is being threatened? Artists? Filmmakers? Songwriters? These are the very individuals whose creativity fuels innovation. This situation represents a disturbing distortion of reality—where the thief accuses the victim of being “unpatriotic” for safeguarding their possessions. In this conflict, Musk has clearly aligned himself with the looters. His remarks have exacerbated the already strained relationship between Silicon Valley and the entertainment industry. Amid Hollywood strikes and ongoing legal disputes, Musk’s position has virtually ensured further estrangement—and potentially, backlash. Cultural historians may eventually regard this moment as a pivotal turning point, when the wealthiest individual attempted to undermine the rights of creators with a single statement—and the public responded. This movement transcends art; it encompasses issues of power, ownership, and the role of technology in either elevating or diminishing humanity. As protest chants intensify—SEND MUSK TO MARS!—one fact stands out: Elon Musk may see himself as a trailblazer for the future, but to the artists he has betrayed, he has become a representation of its appropriation. For millions, the message is not merely symbolic; it is direct, passionate, and urgent: Elon Musk, if you seek a new world and deem Earth obsolete, then go ahead. Prepare your rockets. You are no longer welcome here.
