The US Supreme Court has decided not to review a case regarding the copyrightability of AI-generated art, as reported by The Verge. The court’s decision follows appeals by computer scientist Stephen Thaler from Missouri, challenging a previous ruling that denied copyright protection for AI-generated artworks.
In 2019, Thaler’s attempt to copyright an image created by an algorithm was rejected by the US Copyright Office, citing the lack of ‘human authorship.’ Subsequent reviews in 2022 and a ruling by US District Court Judge Howell in 2023 reinforced this stance, stating that copyright requires human input.
Thaler’s plea to the Supreme Court in 2025 highlighted concerns about the impact on AI creativity, arguing against a perceived ‘chilling effect’ on innovation. However, the Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s decision, aligning with previous determinations on AI-related intellectual property.
Recent guidance from the Copyright Office further clarified that AI-generated art based on textual prompts does not qualify for copyright protection, echoing the stance on human-centric authorship.
The legal debate on AI-generated content extends beyond copyright to patent law, with the US Patent Office and UK Supreme Court both asserting that AI systems lack the legal capacity for patenting due to their non-human nature.
This case underscores the evolving legal landscape around AI creations and the complex intersections between technology and intellectual property rights.
Source: The Verge