Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Federal District Court Denies Copyright to AI-Generated Art Piece
On Aug. 18, 2023, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia affirmed the U.S. Copyright Office's (Copyright Office or the Office) denial of a copyright application for a visual piece of art generated entirely by an artificial intelligence-driven computer called the "Creativity Machine." Thaler v. Perlnutter, No. 22-cv-1564, 2023 WL 5333236 (D.D.C. Aug. 18, 2023). Recognizing that U.S. "copyright law protects only works of human creation," the court determined that the Copyright Office "acted properly in denying copyright registration for a work created absent any human involvement."
The court's ruling is consistent with, but did not defer to, or reference, the Office's March 16, 2023 Copyright Guidance published in the Federal Register entitled "Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence."(March Guidance). U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress, "Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence," U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress, "Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence," Statement of Policy, effective March 16, 2023, (https://bit.ly/40qgQuo). For a work to be copyrightable, per the March Guidance, "it must owe its origin to a human being." Furthermore, the Office "will not register works produced by a machine or mere mechanical process that operates randomly or automatically without any creative input or intervention from a human author."
This premium content is locked for The Intellectual Property Strategist subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.