An artificial intelligence inventor, Stephen Thaler, has taken issue with the U.S. Copyright Office’s stance that only human-created works can be copyrighted. Thaler argues that a painting created by his artificial intelligence system, the “Creativity Machine,” is original, existing work and, as such, should be eligible for copyright protection.
Through a brief submitted to the D.C. Circuit, Thaler articulates his position that regardless of the non-human origin of the work, it still qualifies for registration. He states that if the Creativity Machine is disqualified from being a legal author, then as the creator, owner, programmer, and user of the system that made the artwork, he should hold the copyright.
This argument comes in response to the Copyright Office’s assertion that it has a well-established history of only registering works by human authors. Thaler’s claim raises into sharp focus the current tension centering on copyrights for artificial intelligence-created art. His challenge to the Copyright Office’s interpretation of what is copyrightable could have far-reaching implications and potentially alter the landscape of copyright law as it applies to AI-created works.
The Copyright Office has previously rejected attempts to register AI-generated art and remains silent on Thaler’s latest arguments. This case continues to unfold in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.