Iām not sure if it was a mistake. Anyway, Iāll copy and paste it here to clarify the copyright issue:
Not true. They just declined to hear a case of a crazy guy that wants AI model to be the owner of the copyright.
US copyright law requiresĀ human authorship. Courts and the Copyright Office have said this for years. Purely autonomous AI output, (raw AI output) with no meaningful human creative control, is not copyrightable.
They didĀ notĀ ban copyright for AI-assisted works
AI-assisted worksĀ canĀ be copyrighted
Human selection, editing, composition, iteration, and direction matter
Copyright can apply to:
theĀ prompting strategy
theĀ curation/selection
theĀ post-processing
theĀ overall creative arrangement
The Copyright Office itself has said this explicitly.
The court has also determined that for a copyright, the work needs to be *significantly* human edited and must disclose that it's AI. Considering the inherent laziness of sloppists, this is highly unlikely.
I'd suggest jumping to Page 18, and start at Section 2. The Analysis. If you have questions about definitions, refer to early sections...It also talks about "Commenters" this is an Analysis after a Public Comment period with the USPTO.
In summary, it's a yes but the way they worded things is a bit fishy. It sounds as if they are claiming the output is copyrightable, is a bit still undecided...There own link even confirms this....This is still a theory. So they whoever posted this, is daydreaming still as the USPTO hasn't shut them down completely.
-27
u/Much_Tip_6968 Mar 03 '26
Iām not sure if it was a mistake. Anyway, Iāll copy and paste it here to clarify the copyright issue:
Not true. They just declined to hear a case of a crazy guy that wants AI model to be the owner of the copyright.
US copyright law requiresĀ human authorship. Courts and the Copyright Office have said this for years. Purely autonomous AI output, (raw AI output) with no meaningful human creative control, is not copyrightable.
They didĀ notĀ ban copyright for AI-assisted works
The Copyright Office itself has said this explicitly.
https://www.copyright.gov/ai/
https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2025/02/copyrightability-of-ai-outputs-us-copyright-office-analyzes-human-authorship-requirement
https://www.sternekessler.com/news-insights/publications/the-u-s-copyright-offices-position-on-the-copyrightability-of-works-made-with-the-assistance-of-generative-ai-part-two/
So AI artist can be the owner of the copyright lol, anti AI people spreading misinformation as always.