Jonathan D. Reichman of Hunton Andrews Kurth - Publications , The National Law Review; Entrance to [Copyright] Paradise Halted by the Human-Authorship Requirement
"In mid-March, a federal appeals court affirmed a ruling finding that artwork created solely by an artificial intelligence (AI) system is not entitled to copyright protection. Thaler v. Perlmutter, No. 23-5233 (D.C. Cir. Mar. 18, 2025). This decision aligns with the position taken by the US Copyright Office in its recent report in light of the ongoing evolution, application, and litigation surrounding AI systems. U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 2: Copyrightability (2025).
While this decision may appear straightforward, future developments could arise through an application to the US Supreme Court or through cases addressing the extent of human involvement necessary in AI-generated works that seek copyright protection.
Key Takeaways
- The Copyright Act of 1976 (Act) requires all eligible works to be authored by a human being.
- The Act’s definition of “author” does not apply to machines.
- The work-made-for-hire doctrine requires an existing copyright interest.
- Thaler’s representation that the work was generated autonomously by a computer system weighed heavily against his challenges to the human-authorship requirement and the work-made-for-hire doctrine.
- The Court rejected Dr. Thaler’s arguments that (1) the term “author” is not confined to human beings; (2) the work was made for hire; and (3) the human-authorship requirement prevents protection of works made with AI.
- The Court affirmed the denial of copyright registration where the author of the work was listed as a machine."
