A federal appeals court has unanimously ruled that AI-generated works cannot receive copyright protection in the United States if created without human involvement. This landmark decision reinforces the fundamental requirement that copyrightable works must be authored by humans.

The case centered on computer scientist Dr. Stephen Thaler's attempt to copyright an AI-generated image titled "A Recent Entrance to Paradise," created by his "Creativity Machine" system. The US Copyright Office rejected the application because Thaler listed the AI system as the sole author, violating the requirement for human authorship.

After unsuccessful appeals in lower courts, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed the previous rulings. Circuit Judge Patricia A. Millett emphasized that the Copyright Act of 1976 explicitly requires human authorship for eligible works.

Key points of the ruling:

• AI-generated works without human involvement cannot be copyrighted
• The Copyright Office allows registration of works where humans use AI as a tool
• The decision aligns with previous cases, such as the "monkey selfie" ruling
• Only Congress has the authority to update copyright law for new technologies

The National Press Photographers Association's Deputy General Counsel, Alicia Calzada, supported the decision, noting its consistency with decades of copyright law precedent.

This ruling clarifies the distinction between AI as a creative tool and AI as an autonomous creator, maintaining the human-centric nature of copyright protection in the United States.

Related Articles

Previous Articles