The Copyright Office's stance has been compared to the early days of photography when courts were deciding how copyright law should handle the new technology. The office has argued that using AI to generate art is a “merely mechanical” process with “no place for novelty, invention, or originality”, similar to how some argued that photographs were just mechanical reproductions of scenes. However, this view has been criticized, with some arguing that just as a photographer makes creative choices when taking a photo, so too does an AI when generating art.
Key takeaways:
- The US Copyright Office has repeatedly ruled that AI-generated art cannot be copyrighted, including the AI-generated image _Théâtre D'opéra Spatial_ that won an art competition.
- The Copyright Office's stance is that copyright protection is only available for works created by human beings, not AI systems or other non-human entities.
- There is debate over whether AI-generated art is categorically excluded from copyright protection, or if the creators of the AI should be listed as the creators of the art.
- The Copyright Office's stance on AI-generated art is compared to the early days of photography, when there was debate over whether photographs, as mechanical reproductions, should be eligible for copyright protection. The Supreme Court ruled in 1884 that photographs reflecting creative choices by the photographer deserved copyright protection.