US Appeals Court Rejects Copyright for AI-Generated Art, Affirming Human Authorship Requirement
10 Sources
[1]
Judge disses Star Trek icon Data's poetry while ruling AI can't author works
A computer scientist who tried to register an artwork that credited an artificial intelligence system as the sole author lost his appeal on Tuesday. A three-judge panel for the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously agreed with the Copyright Office that Stephen Thaler's
[2]
US appeals court says AI authors don't qualify for copyright
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has affirmed a lower court ruling that content created by an AI model without human input cannot be copyrighted. The plaintiff in this case is computer scientist Stephen Thaler, who developed a machine-learning system called the
[3]
US appeals court rejects copyrights for AI-generated art lacking 'human' creator
March 18 - A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday affirmed that a work of art generated by artificial intelligence without human input cannot be copyrighted under U.S. law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit agreed, opens new tab with the U.S. Copyright
[4]
Art created autonomously by AI cannot be copyrighted, federal appeals court rules
Despite the ruling, Abbott said he "was very pleased to see that the case has been successful in drawing public attention to these very important public policy issues." The Copyright Office first denied Thaler's application in August 2019, saying, "We cannot register this work because it lacks the
[5]
US Court of Appeals Unanimously Denies Copyright Protection for AI-Created Images
A unanimous federal appeals court ruled that pictures generated solely by machines do not qualify for copyright protection. "The Copyright Act of 1976 requires all eligible work to be authorized in the first instance by a human being," said the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
[6]
Art created autonomously by AI cannot be copyrighted, federal appeals court rules
A federal appeals court ruled that art created autonomously by artificial intelligence cannot be copyrighted, saying that at least initial human authorship is required for a copyright. The "Copyright Office's longstanding rule requiring a human author ... does not prohibit copyrighting work that
[7]
Court rules copyrighting AI-generated art is a no-go - even if you invented the software - SiliconANGLE
Court rules copyrighting AI-generated art is a no-go - even if you invented the software A U.S. federal appeals court today ruled that art created solely by artificial intelligence cannot be granted copyright protection. A three-judge panel for the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
[8]
Court ruling on AI-generated art | Newswise
A federal appeals court recently ruled that art created independently by artificial intelligence cannot be copyrighted, saying copyright protection requires a human being to author the work. University of Illinois Chicago-based AI policy and law experts Michael Bennett, associate vice chancellor
[9]
US Appeals Court Rejects Copyrights for AI-Generated Art Lacking 'Human' Creator
A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday affirmed that a work of art generated by artificial intelligence without human input cannot be copyrighted under U.S. law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit agreed with the U.S. Copyright Office that an image
[10]
US appeals court rejects copyrights for AI-generated art lacking 'human' creator
A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday affirmed that a work of art generated by artificial intelligence without human input cannot be copyrighted under U.S. law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit agreed with the U.S. Copyright Office that an image
Share
Copy Link
A federal appeals court has ruled that AI-generated artwork without human input cannot be copyrighted, upholding the US Copyright Office's decision in a case involving computer scientist Stephen Thaler's AI system.
US Appeals Court Upholds Copyright Office Decision
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has unanimously affirmed a lower court ruling that content created solely by artificial intelligence (AI) systems cannot be copyrighted under U.S. law
1
2
. This decision comes in response to computer scientist Stephen Thaler's attempt to register an artwork titled "A Recent Entrance to Paradise," which was generated by his AI system called the "Creativity Machine"3
.The Case and Its Implications
Thaler applied for a copyright in 2018, listing his AI system as the sole author of the artwork. The U.S. Copyright Office rejected his application in 2022, stating that creative works must have human authors to be copyrightable
4
. Thaler then took the matter to court, arguing that the Copyright Office's human authorship requirement was "unconstitutional and unsupported by either statute or case law"5
.Judge Patricia Millett, writing for the three-judge panel, stated that "the Copyright Act of 1976 requires all eligible work to be authored in the first instance by a human being"
2
. The court's decision emphasizes that many provisions of the Copyright Act only make sense if the author is a human, such as the duration of copyright being tied to the author's lifespan and the ability to transfer copyrights to surviving spouses or children1
.Implications for AI-Assisted Works
While the ruling denies copyright protection for works created solely by AI, it does acknowledge that works made by humans with AI assistance can still qualify for copyright
2
. However, the court noted that there is currently no legal standard defining the amount of human participation necessary for such recognition2
.Future of AI and Copyright Law
The appeals court suggested that if AI technology ever reaches a level of intelligence comparable to humans, copyright laws could potentially shift to grant copyrights to AI-authored works
1
. Judge Millett referenced the Star Trek character Data as an example of such advanced AI, though she humorously critiqued Data's poetry skills1
.Reactions and Next Steps
Thaler's attorney, Ryan Abbott, stated that they "strongly disagree" with the ruling and intend to appeal
3
. Meanwhile, the Copyright Office expressed satisfaction with the court's decision3
. The case has successfully drawn public attention to important policy issues surrounding AI and copyright5
.Related Stories
Broader Context of AI and Copyright
This ruling comes at a time when the use of AI to produce original work is rapidly increasing across industries and creative fields
5
. The Copyright Office has previously rejected artists' bids for copyrights on images generated by other AI systems, such as Midjourney3
. The decision aligns with previous rulings, such as the case of a monkey selfie that was deemed not copyrightable due to lack of human authorship4
.Legal and Policy Considerations
The court emphasized that any changes to copyright law to accommodate AI-generated works would need to come from Congress, not from courts reinterpreting existing statutes
4
. This stance is consistent with how copyright law has evolved to include other technologies like photography, sound recordings, and computer programs4
.As AI technology continues to advance, this ruling sets a significant precedent for how the legal system will approach the intersection of artificial intelligence and intellectual property rights in the coming years.
References
Summarized by
Navi
[2]
Related Stories
Recent Highlights
1
OpenAI Claims AI Math Breakthrough on Navier-Stokes, Sparks Controversy Over Credit and Future of Research
Science and Research
2
Anthropic Researcher Quits, Warns Self-Improving AI Poses Existential Risk to Humanity
Policy and Regulation
3
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Declares AGI Has Arrived With OpenAI's GPT-6 Astra Release
Technology
Recent Highlights
Today's Top Stories
Don’t drown in AI news. We cut through the noise - filtering, ranking and summarizing the most important AI news, breakthroughs and research daily. Follow topics that matter to you and stay ahead.
