Artwork generated by AI cannot be copyrighted, rules a judge

D.C. court judge rules that AI-generated art will not qualify for copyright protection

Artwork generated by AI cannot be copyrighted, rules a federal judge in Washington, D.C. The judge has ruled that artworks produced solely by artificial intelligence lack the human touch required for copyright protection.

The court supported the US Copyright Office’s decision to deny copyright registration for an AI-generated artwork, marking a defining moment in the realm of AI-driven creativity.

The popularity of AI-powered tools like ChatGPT and DALL-E has propelled AI-generated art to new heights. This verdict establishes the necessity of human involvement in the copyright equation.

However, as AI’s role in art evolves, questions about required human input and the originality of AI-created works will continue to challenge legal and creative boundaries.

But it’s all still a bit confusing. According to agencies, in March the U.S. Copyright Office itself published guidance saying it is open to granting protection and ownership to AI-generated work on a “case-by-case” basis. Basically, if something is created completely by AI, then it is not copyrightable; if it is created by a human with the support of AI, then it could potentially be copyrightable.

What is copyright?

Copyright refers to the legal right of the owner of intellectual property. In simpler terms, copyright is the right to copy. This means that the original creators of products and anyone they give authorization to are the only ones with the exclusive right to reproduce the work.

Read also – AI has generated more photos than 150 years of photography