AI-Created Art Denied Copyright Protection, Human Authorship Deemed Essential

In a landmark decision, a U.S. federal judge has aligned with the stance of the American government, ruling that art produced by artificial intelligence is not subject to copyright law within the United States, citing the absence of human creativity. Judge Beryl Howell from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia articulated in her judgment, acquired by The Hollywood Reporter, “The stretch of copyright has never reached to shield works crafted by innovative technology functioning without the direction of a human, as the plaintiff has insisted here.” She went on to state that “Human authorship is a foundational necessity for copyright.”

In 2022, computer scientist Dr. Stephen Thaler pursued legal action against the U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) when his second application to copyright a piece of art named A Recent Entrance to Paradise was dismissed. The USCO agreed that the Creativity Machine, an AI model Thaler coined, generated the piece. Thaler attempted to copyright the piece himself, labeling it “a work-for-hire for the owner of the Creativity Machine” and argued that the USCO’s stipulation of “human authorship” was contrary to the constitution.

Judge Howell referenced past decisions, such as the renowned case involving a monkey that snapped some selfies, where copyright claims were refuted due to the absence of human creation. The judge penned, “The legal system has consistently refused to acknowledge copyright for creations devoid of human participation.”

Howell also remarked on the increasing impact of generative AI on the artistic world, acknowledging that it will prompt “difficult questions” regarding how much human contribution is necessary for copyright eligibility and the originality of works crafted by systems drawing from copyrighted pieces.

However, in Thaler’s case, Howell asserted that it was relatively uncomplicated since Thaler himself conceded that he did not participate in the creation of A Recent Entrance to Paradise. The ruling was clear, “Without any human contribution in the crafting of the work, the unambiguous and simple response is the one handed down by the [Federal] Register: No,” declared Howell. Thaler intends to challenge the judgment.

This ruling, as reported by Bloomberg, is a first in the U.S. regarding copyright safeguards for AI-forged art, an area the USCO has been grappling with. In March, they offered guidance on the ineligibility of AI-generated images based on text prompts for copyright protection, though there is room for interpretation. “The resolution will hinge on the specifics, chiefly the manner in which the AI tool functions and how it was utilized to forge the final piece,” the USCO explained. “This is inherently an individual examination.”

Furthermore, the agency provided restricted copyright protection for a graphic novel containing AI-produced components. It declared in February that the images created by Midjourney in Kris Kashtanova’s Zarya of the Dawn were not suitable for copyright, but the text and layout were eligible.

For those tech-savvy shoppers among you, all products endorsed by BuyTechBlog are handpicked by our editorial team, without influence from our parent organization. Keep in mind, if you purchase something via one of the affiliate links, we might earn a commission. Rest assured, all prices are accurate at the point of publication.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about AI-generated art

More about AI-generated art

• The Hollywood Reporter
• Bloomberg
• U.S. Copyright Office Guidance on AI-generated Images
• BuyTechBlog
• Kris Kashtanova’s Zarya of the Dawn