US EditionUS Supreme Court declines to hear dispute over copyrights for AI-generated material
The Supreme Court upheld that copyright law requires human authorship, leaving AI-generated art ineligible despite growing use of AI tools in creative industries.
- On March 2, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Stephen Thaler's appeal over copyright for the AI-created image `A Recent Entrance to Paradise` made by DABUS.
- Because lower courts found human authorship essential, the U.S. Copyright Office rejected Thaler's 2022 application, with a federal judge calling it a `bedrock requirement` in 2023 and the D.C. Circuit affirming in 2025.
- The Copyright Office has separately rejected artists' Midjourney registrations, while the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rejected Thaler's patent applications and the Supreme Court previously refused to hear a related patent case.
- President Donald Trump's administration urged the Court not to review the appeal, arguing the Copyright Act's `author` language refers to humans, affecting artists and creators seeking copyright registrations.
- Thaler's lawyers told the Supreme Court the case was of "paramount importance" given the rapid rise of generative AI and warned refusal could make relief too late, harming AI development during critical years.
10 Articles
10 Articles
U.S. Supreme Court rejects AI copyright case: No human, no copyright - Tech Startups
The U.S. Supreme Court just sidestepped one of the biggest legal questions hanging over generative AI. On Monday, the justices declined to hear a closely watched case that asked whether artwork created entirely by artificial intelligence can qualify for copyright […] The post U.S. Supreme Court rejects AI copyright case: No human, no copyright first appeared on Tech Startups.
The Supreme Court doesn't care if you want to copyright your AI-generated art
As AI-generated artwork becomes more commonplace, it still won't be able to be copyrighted, according to US courts. On Monday, the US Supreme Court declined to hear a case about whether an artwork generated with the help of AI can be copyrighted. The refusal means that a lower court's decision to reject the copyright request will stand. The case dates back to 2018 when Stephen Thaler applied for a copyright of an artwork called A Recent Entrance…
US Supreme Court declines to hear dispute over copyrights for AI-generated material
The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to take up the issue of whether art generated by artificial intelligence can be copyrighted under U.S. law, turning away a case involving a computer scientist from Missouri who was denied a copyright for a piece of visual art made by his AI system.
US Supreme Court declines to take up AI-generated art copyright dispute
The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to take up the issue of whether art generated by artificial intelligence can be copyrighted under U.S. law. The court turned away a case involving a computer scientist from Missouri who was denied a copyright for a piece of visual art made by artificial intelligence. Plaintiff Stephen Thaler approached the justices after the lower courts upheld a decision by the U.S. Copyrights Office, which said that a…
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 57% of the sources are Center
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
