Particle.news
Download on the App Store

Supreme Court Leaves In Place Rulings That AI-Only Art Lacks Copyright

The denial cements that U.S. copyright protects only works with human authorship, not images generated solely by machines.

Overview

  • On March 2, 2026, the Court declined to hear Stephen Thaler’s appeal in Thaler v. Perlmutter, ending his effort to name an AI system as an author of the image A Recent Entrance to Paradise.
  • The D.C. Circuit previously affirmed that the Creativity Machine cannot be an author because the Copyright Act requires initial authorship by a human being, as written by Judge Patricia A. Millett.
  • District Judge Beryl A. Howell earlier upheld the Copyright Office’s refusal, calling human authorship a bedrock requirement of copyright.
  • The Copyright Office first rejected Thaler’s 2018 application in 2019 for lacking human authorship, citing long-standing doctrine reflected in its Compendium and cases like Burrow-Giles v. Sarony.
  • The Solicitor General supported the narrow framing that the ruling concerns machine authorship only, noting that works made with AI can still be protected when a human author’s creative contribution exists.