Generative Artificial Intelligence has triggered a wave of design, music, articles, novels and even series. And this has raised a fundamental question in intellectual property (IP) law: When an AI generates something, who owns the work?
The need for human authorship
The U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) has a clear answer for the question above: AI cannot own copyright, and items generated by non-humans are not eligible for copyright protection. U.S. copyright law is based on the idea of “original works of authorship,” which the USCO has consistently stated must involve human authorship. If a work is entirely the product of an AI algorithm, regardless of how detailed the prompts are, it does not have the essential element of human creativity and is considered public domain.
Complexities in ownership
The use of AI is still important for creators, but ownership issues can arise when combining human effort with AI-generated content. For example:
- Pure AI output: This does not receive copyright protection and is not owned by the user, the AI company, or the AI itself.
- Human modification: If a person significantly edits, organizes, or alters AI-generated content, these modifications might be original enough to qualify for copyright. The USCO has some examples of how to submit applications.
- AI company’s rights: Although AI-generated content is public, the software (including code and models) is protected by intellectual property laws. Additionally, the AI company’s Terms of Service dictate how you can use the AI output for commercial purposes. This is why reading those terms before engaging in creative work is crucial.
Understanding the difference between human creativity and AI automation is crucial for safeguarding your business assets. If your business depends on AI-produced content, having a seasoned IP attorney is essential to navigate the evolving regulations and ensure your work is legally protected.