On Monday, the US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by an artist denied copyright for digital art created by personalized AI software. Plaintiff Stephen Thaler filed for copyright of a piece of moving digital art in 2018. The application was rejected by the US Copyright Office in 2022. The office argued that the Missouri computer scientist’s art was not eligible for copyright protection because it was not created by a human.
AI has turned us all into surveillance targets. This tool helps you fight back.
The decision came ahead of a 2025 report from the US Copyright Office, which offered further interpretation of the law and eligibility for copyright shelter, writing that “unedited outputs of generative AI tools” would not be eligible for protection. The report says art has been facilitated by AI but “retains the centrality of human being “Creativity” may qualify, but not merely machine-determined expressive elements.
mashable light speed
Copyright of AI-generated and AI-assisted art works remains an ongoing battle. The office has previously rejected copyright claims from artists who argue that certain forms of art created with the aid of AI tools – rather than art independently generated by AI software – should fall under the 2025 interpretation of US copyright law.
Thaler has also appealed to the Supreme Court over rejected US Patent and Trademark Office applications, urging the court to decide whether AI-generated inventions are eligible for US patent protection. The Trump administration was pressuring the court to refuse to hear Thaler’s copyright case, CNBC reported.
Thaler’s lawyers expressed disappointment at the court’s decision not to take the case. “Even if it later overturns the Copyright Office’s test in another case, it will be too late. The Copyright Office will have irreversibly and negatively impacted AI development and use in the creative industry during critical years.”
<a href