Your comment is way off-base. If you publish a paper, the expression is copyrighted, but your algorithm is not protected at all. If you want to protect the algorithm, you need a patent. Then, the person "making billions" needs to pay you a license fee.

However, even then:

- An algorithm is not patentable. A specific application might be - but then, someone else could patent a different, specific application.

- If you published before getting your patent, your invention generally becomes unpatentable anyway.

However, we were discussing copyright. Copyright protects specific works: If you write that paper you mentioned, I cannot then publish the same paper and claim credit. If you paint a picture, I cannot sell copies of that picture. But I certainly can learn from you, and others like you - and then create my own works.

The fact that AI is more efficient at this? So what? That does not in any way affect the principle.