Is it possible to award the strange legal legend of AI systems this week?
In a unanimous ruling, the US DC Circuit Court of Appeals held that works independently created by AI are not eligible for copyright protection under current laws.
The three panel of judges confirmed the lower court’s 2023 decision, that it can only cooperate with human writers and be registered with the US copyright.
The case goes back to the failed attempt of computer scientist Stephen Thaler, “The Recent Entrance to Heaven,” a creepy, fantastic image ended by Thaler’s AI “Thaler’s Creativity Machine”.
more than: Stephen Thaler’s “Newest Entrance to Heaven” was founded in 2012.
When Thaler tried to register for a job, the Copyright Office flatly rejected his application and believed that “there is a lack of human authors supporting copyright claims.”
Tale suedinsisting that the “human author” requirement of the Office of Copyright has no legal basis. He believes that the granting of copyright to AI creation will further promote the constitutional goal of “the progress of science and useful art.”
In 2023, a federal judge decisively supported the Copyright Office, calling human authorship a “corresponding requirement for copyright.”
“We are approaching the new boundaries of copyright when artists put AI in the toolbox,” the judge wrote at the time. “However, this situation is not that complicated.”
The Court of Appeal agreed to rule that “the author is the center of copyright law” and that the clear meaning of the law limits the author’s identity to humans. Taller said he strongly disagrees with the plan to ruling and plan appeals.
As AI-generated content grows, courts are working to address ownership and rights issues.
Although this situation provides some clarity for fully autonomous AI art, many of the issues with human/AI collaboration remains primarily uneasy.
