Judge Rules That AI-Generated Art Cannot Be Copyrighted
Stating that “human authorship is a bedrock requirement of copyright.”
Throughout the decade thus far, Artificial Intelligence has undergone significant innovation that has shaken all sorts of industries. Programs such as ChatGPT and the myriad of AI art generators that continue to pop up have taken the world by storm, presenting various unprecedented cases. Already, art-based awards have been granted to AI-generated works, stirring up controversy from artists and fans alike. Now, a recent court case has taken a stance against the protection of AI-created pieces.
This past Friday, United States District Court Judge Beryl Howell ruled that art created by AI is not able to be protected by copyright law, as part of Thaler v. Perlmutter. The case itself centers around Thaler attempting to copyright an image produced by AI that was rejected by the United States Copyright Office. Its rejection was due to a lack of human authorship, which Judge Howell similarly noted by sharing “human authorship is a bedrock requirement.”
However, the legal evaluation of AI-generated works is far from over as various ongoing cases continue to determine how the practice will be treated moving forward.
For more of the latest art news, the Orlando Museum of Art is suing its former director for staging a Basquiat exhibition that featured 25 fake artworks.
