Artwork Created By Artificial Intelligence (AI) Not Eligible For Copyright – Intellectual Property – United States – Mondaq News Alerts
United States:
Artwork Created By Artificial Intelligence (AI) Not Eligible For Copyright
…….
United States:
Artwork Created By Artificial Intelligence (AI) Not Eligible For Copyright
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
In 2018, Steven Thaler filed an application to register a
copyright for a computer-generated image created autonomously by a
computer algorithm, the “Creativity Machine”. (We
previously wrote about Mr. Thaler’s unsuccessful
attempt to obtain a patent naming an AI machine as the inventor.)
The image, entitled “A Recent Entrance to
Paradise,” represents a “simulated near-death
experience” in which an algorithm reprocesses pictures to
create hallucinatory images in creating a fictional narrative about
the afterlife.
The application was refused by the U.S. Copyright Office Review
Board because it lacked human authorship. After receiving a second
request for reconsideration from Thaler, the Board confirmed on
February 14, 2022 that human authorship is a prerequisite to
copyright protection in the United States and that the image could
therefore not be registered.
In doing so, the Board accepted Thaler’s representation that
the image was autonomously created by artificial intelligence
without any creative contribution from a human. Thaler did not seek
to be named the registered author. Thus, the primary issue before
the Board was Thaler’s assertion that the human authorship
requirement is unconstitutional and unsupported by case law.
The Board, however, understands Supreme Court as viewing the
nexus between the human mind and creative expression as a
prerequisite for copyright protection, and likewise, reads lower
court cases as having “repeatedly rejected attempts to extend
copyright protection to non-human creations.”
For example, a book containing words “authored’ by
non-human spiritual beings” can gain copyright protection only
if there is “human selection and arrangement of the
revelations.” Urantia Found. v. Kristen Maaherra,
114 F.3d 955, 957-59 (9th Cir. 1997). And a monkey cannot register
a copyright in photos it captures with a camera, Naruto v. Slater, 888 F.3d 418, 426
(9thCir. 2018).
With advances in artificial intelligence accelerating at an
exponential rate, there is no doubt this question will be raised
again. Evolution in artificial intelligence will force continued
evaluation of what separates creative expression of humans from
that of machines, and to what extent machines will remain the
servants of humankind.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Intellectual Property from United States
Employee/Officer Held Personally Liable For Patent Infringement
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP
In Lubby Holdings LLC v. Chung, the Federal Circuit held corporate officers and employees who actively assist with their corporation’s infringement may be personally liable for inducing infringement even without any piercing of the corporate veil.
