The Supreme Court doesn't care if you want to copyright your AI-generated art

"On Monday, the US Supreme Court declined to hear a case about whether an artwork generated with the help of AI can be copyrighted. The refusal means that a lower court's decision to reject the copyright request will stand."

"The US Copyright Office rejected his application in 2022 on the grounds that it wasn't made by a human author. Thaler sought appeals at higher courts, but ultimately had to escalate the case to the Supreme Court after both a federal judge in Washington and the US Court of Appeals ruled against him."

"With a refusal from the highest court in the US, it's unlikely Thaler's case can continue. The US Supreme Court could always hear a related case in the future, but Thaler's lawyers said, 'even if it later overturns the Copyright Office's test in another case, it will be too late.'"

The US Supreme Court refused to hear a case challenging the denial of copyright protection for AI-generated artwork. Stephen Thaler, a computer scientist, created an artwork called A Recent Entrance to Paradise using a custom AI system and applied for copyright in 2018. The US Copyright Office rejected the application in 2022, citing lack of human authorship. After losing appeals in federal court and the Court of Appeals, Thaler escalated to the Supreme Court. The Court's refusal means the lower court decision stands, establishing that AI-generated artwork cannot be copyrighted. Thaler's legal team expressed concern that this decision will negatively impact the creative industry during critical years.

Read at Engadget