A Washington, D.C., federal judge agrees with the U.S. Copyright Office: when it comes to copyright, the human touch is indispensable. It serves as a reminder to creators that while AI can be a tool, it can't replace human involvement in the domain of intellectual property rights.
A piece of art created entirely by a machine will not receive copyright protection. But what about work created through the aid of AI? That is not entirely clear. Filing works containing portions generated by artificial intelligence may require proof of a certain degree of human authorship before copyright protection is granted.
In different parts of the world, there are varying standards regarding the copyright of AI-generated artwork. For example, in the UK, artwork generated by a computer is protected even without a showing of human involvement. The legal "author" of an AI-generated work is considered "the person by whom the arrangements necessary for the creation of the work are undertaken." On the other hand, the European Union mandates that "human creativity" be evident for copyright protection. European Commission, Trends and Developments in Artificial Intelligence Challenges to the Intellectual Property Rights Framework, p. 80 (2020).
While the lines of copyrightability for works that are created through some use of AI are still blurred, what is clear is artists and companies alike should document all human interactions involved in creating IP. In the meantime, we will continue to watch AI+IP trends worldwide.
/Passle/6488db705f4287c6f3e7c2d7/SearchServiceImages/2024-05-17-15-46-44-577-66477be4c95e4623e7c85032.jpg)
/Passle/6488db705f4287c6f3e7c2d7/MediaLibrary/Images/2024-05-13-12-12-50-019-664203c20459f0e46813202e.JPG)
/Passle/6488db705f4287c6f3e7c2d7/SearchServiceImages/2024-04-30-02-33-00-164-6630585c7a56bfff0cda7d0e.jpg)