A US court in Washington, D.C., has ruled that artworks generated solely by artificial intelligence (AI-generated art) without any human involvement cannot be copyrighted under U.S. law. U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell upheld the Copyright Office’s rejection of an application filed by computer scientist Stephen Thaler on behalf of his AI system called DABUS (Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience).
The court’s decision underscores the principle that only works with human authors are eligible for copyright protection. Thaler’s attorney, Ryan Abbott, expressed disagreement with the ruling and announced plans to appeal. The Copyright Office, on the other hand, supported the court’s decision and stated that it believes the correct outcome was reached.
This case highlights the emerging legal challenges related to AI-generated art content and intellectual property rights. The field of generative AI is raising questions about copyright and authorship, especially as artists increasingly incorporate AI tools into their creative processes. The court’s ruling has implications for the evolving landscape of copyright law in the digital age.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.