A federal judge has delivered a landmark ruling that artwork created solely by artificial intelligence systems cannot be copyrighted under current US law. The decision came in a closely-watched case brought by Dr. Stephen Thaler, who attempted to copyright an image produced autonomously by his AI system DABUS.
District Judge Beryl A. Howell examined whether the image, titled “A Recent Entrance to Paradise,” met the crucial originality requirement for copyright protection. She found that works generated by AI, without creative input or intervention from a human author, are purely the mechanical output of a computer system. As such, they do not reflect the intellectual conception and intent required for human authorship of a creative work.
In the ruling handed down on August 21, 2023, Judge Howell stated that “human authorship is a prerequisite to copyright protection in the United States.” She rejected Thaler’s assertion that an AI system could qualify as an “author” under the law, noting that this would contradict legislative history and past rulings.
The US Copyright Office had already set a precedent in this area, stating in March 2023 that it would refuse registration applications that credited an AI as the sole creator of a work. However, Thaler’s case represented the first time a federal court had issued a definitive judgment on AI copyright eligibility.
Silvia Bellei, an IP expert at Withers law firm, said the ruling was no surprise. “An AI system lacks human consciousness or intent,” she commented. “At present it remains a tool, albeit an increasingly sophisticated one.”
Nonetheless, the decision carries major implications for AI-generated art, music, literature and other creative works. Under current copyright law, AI systems can only play a supporting role, while a human creator must make some substantive contribution as the author.
This will make it difficult for businesses to fully capitalize on art produced autonomously by AI, as these works will reside in the public domain. It raises concerns over uncompensated use and distribution of AI art on platforms like DALL-E 2, Stable Diffusion and others.
However, Judge Howell acknowledged that future technological developments could shift perspectives on legal protections for AI creations. As systems become more advanced and autonomous, pressure will likely grow to extend authorship status beyond humans.
“The Court does not rule out the possibility that future technological developments may merit further analysis of the Copyright Act’s scope of protection,” she wrote. For now though, this ruling represents a major declaration that human creativity remains the essence of copyrightable art.
