US Federal judge rules AI artwork can’t be copyrighted

The astonishing functionalities of large language models (LLM) like ChatGPT were, just a few months ago, the epitome of cutting-edge AI. (Pexels Photo)

In a landmark case last Friday, a federal judge in the United States ruled that artwork generated by AI (artificial intelligence) programs cannot be copyrighted.

Stephen Tahler, a computer scientist, attempted to register copyright for a piece of artwork he created with AI. The U.S. Copyright Office then denied his request, and this subsequent ruling by judge Berly A. Howell came to the same conclusion, focusing on the requirement of “human authorship” as a “bedrock requirement” in the registration of copyright.

This “human authorship” requirement was also previously brought up in the famous monkey selfie case. The case involved a dispute over copyright ownership of a selfie taken by a crested black macaque using a photographer’s camera in 2011. The photographer, David Slater, claimed copyright, but animal rights activists argued that the macaque, named Naruto, should own the copyright since it took the photo. The case eventually settled with Slater agreeing to donate a portion of the proceeds from the photo’s sales to wildlife organizations, highlighting complex issues around copyright and non-human creators.

However, according to Artnet, the U.S. Supreme Court had, in the past, ruled that “technological changes must be considered when interpreting the Copyright Act”. With this in mind, the future of how copyright with regards to AI generated work may still change in the coming years.