Based on an analysis of copyright law and policy, informed by the many thoughtful
comments in response to our NOI, the Office makes the following conclusions and
recommendations:
Questions of copyrightability and AI can be resolved pursuant to existing law,
without the need for legislative change.
The use of AI tools to assist rather than stand in for human creativity does not affect
the availability of copyright protection for the output.
Copyright protects the original expression in a work created by a human author,
even if the work also includes AI-generated material.
Copyright does not extend to purely AI-generated material, or material where there
is insufficient human control over the expressive elements.
Whether human contributions to AI-generated outputs are sufficient to constitute
authorship must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis.
Based on the functioning of current generally available technology, prompts do not
alone provide sufficient control.
Human authors are entitled to copyright in their works of authorship that are
perceptible in AI-generated outputs, as well as the creative selection, coordination,
or arrangement of material in the outputs, or creative modifications of the outputs.
The case has not been made for additional copyright or sui generis protection for AI-
generated content.
The Office will continue to monitor technological and legal developments to determine
whether any of these conclusions should be revisited. It will also provide ongoing assistance to
the public, including through additional registration guidance and an update to the
Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices.
So, you can have copyright if you used an AI to assist in the production of a work – not just on edits – but case-by-case judgement is needed.
Sure, and if the Unhinged States of America decides to toss copyright completely overboard in its current thrashing, well, I won’t be complaining. 🫠️
Until we hear otherwise though, I’ll assume the findings of the Copyright Office are correct. They seem reasonable enough given current tech and the assumption that copyright does continue to exist.
The US Copyright Office made a report about copyrightability of AI works a while back: https://copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf
So, you can have copyright if you used an AI to assist in the production of a work – not just on edits – but case-by-case judgement is needed.
But who knows what rules this could be changed to have to follow, potentially even mere days to weeks from now.
Nothing is certain anymore, in regards to the USA governmental functions.
Sure, and if the Unhinged States of America decides to toss copyright completely overboard in its current thrashing, well, I won’t be complaining. 🫠️
Until we hear otherwise though, I’ll assume the findings of the Copyright Office are correct. They seem reasonable enough given current tech and the assumption that copyright does continue to exist.
I imagine that the copyright office is too boring when for Nazis to touch, but I’ve been wrong before.