Supreme Court Declines AI Copyright Case, Extending Legal Setback for AI-Generated Works
The post Supreme Court Declines AI Copyright Case, Extending Legal Setback for AI-Generated Works appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com.
In brief The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case over copyrights for AI-generated art. Courts continue to rule that intellectual property protections require human creators. Similar patent rulings involving the same AI system reinforce that standard. The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a case challenging whether artwork created entirely by generative artificial intelligence qualifies for copyright protection, leaving intact rulings that limit U.S. copyrights to works created by humans. The dispute involved computer scientist Stephen Thaler, who is seeking copyright protection for an image generated by his artificial intelligence. Lower courts upheld a U.S. Copyright Office decision rejecting the application because the work lacked a human author. “Thaler has been pursuing this somewhat quixotic litigation over an image created by an early generative AI model that he created and named the ‘creativity machine,’” Brian Fyre, a University of Kentucky law professor, told Decrypt. Thaler first applied in 2018 for copyright protection covering “A Recent Entrance to Paradise,” a visual artwork he said was autonomously created by his AI system, the Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience or DABUS. The Copyright Office rejected the application in 2022, finding that creative works must have human authors to qualify for protection. In 2023, a federal judge sided with the U.S. Copyright Office in Thaler v. Perlmutter, ruling that images created entirely by artificial intelligence are not eligible for copyright protection because U.S. law protects only works with human authorship. A federal judge in Washington upheld the decision, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed that ruling in 2025. “Pretty much everyone across the board has said human authorship is required, and AI doesn’t have human authorship, whatever we mean by that,” Fyre said. In October, attorneys for Thaler filed…
Filed under: News - @ March 2, 2026 9:26 pm