AI-Generated Art Can't Be Copyrighted After Supreme Court Declines To Review the Rule

Source: Slashdot

Background

The U.S. Copyright Office has taken the position that AI‑generated works lack the required human authorship for copyright protection. In 2019, the Office rejected computer scientist Stephen Thaler’s request to copyright an image titled A Recent Entrance to Paradise, which was created by an algorithm he developed. The Office’s 2022 review concluded that the image did not contain “human authorship,” disqualifying it from copyright protection.

Supreme Court Decision

The Supreme Court of the United States declined to review the case challenging this stance, leaving the lower‑court rulings in place. The decision follows several prior rulings:

• In 2023, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell affirmed that “human authorship is a bedrock requirement of copyright.”
• In 2025, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. upheld that AI‑generated art cannot be copyrighted. Source

Thaler had asked the Supreme Court to hear the case in October 2025, arguing that the ruling created a chilling effect on the use of AI for creative purposes. Reuters report

Related Legal Context

• The U.S. Federal Circuit has ruled that AI systems cannot patent inventions because they are not human inventors. Details
• The U.S. Patent Office reaffirmed this position in 2024 with new guidance. Guidance
• The UK Supreme Court reached a similar conclusion regarding AI and patentability. UK ruling