Introduction
In January 2025 [6], the United States Copyright Office announced a pivotal change in its policy regarding copyright registration for works created with the assistance of generative AI. This new approach allows for copyright protection of such works, provided there is substantial human influence over the final product. This decision marks a significant development in the intersection of artificial intelligence and copyright law, impacting creators who utilize AI tools in their artistic processes.
Description
In January 2025 [6], the United States Copyright Office announced a significant shift in its approach to copyright registration for works created with the assistance of generative AI. It will now grant copyright protection to such works, provided that a human author demonstrates substantial influence over the final product [6]. This decision allows for the protection of works like “Zarya of the Dawn,” a graphic novel created using AI tools [6], as long as the human author contributes original ideas and direction [6].
Invoke successfully registered an AI-generated image titled “A Single Piece of American Cheese” under the work-made-for-hire doctrine [5], marking the first such registration by the US Copyright Office [5]. The CEO of Invoke demonstrated sufficient human creativity in the creation of the image [3], which involved the use of the platform’s inpainting features to iteratively enhance the AI-generated artwork, incorporating approximately 35 AI edits [3]. The registration was based on the human author’s selection [5], coordination [3] [5], and arrangement of the inpainted components [3], rather than the individual AI-generated segments [3] [4]. This aligns with the principle that works incorporating AI-generated content may be eligible for copyright if they involve significant human creative input [4], such as arranging images and pairing them with original text [4].
The Copyright Office has established that images created entirely by AI [2], without significant human editing [2], are not eligible for copyright protection due to insufficient human contribution [2] [7]. However, it acknowledges that AI-generated works exhibiting evidence of human creative choices can qualify for copyright protection, provided they meet the minimum originality standard [5]. While prompts used to generate AI art cannot be copyrighted due to a lack of sufficient human control, they may be eligible for copyright if they demonstrate a level of creativity [1], particularly if they contain expressive elements [4]. In the case of “A Single Piece of American Cheese,” while the individual elements of the artwork are not copyrightable, the overall composition can be protected [2], indicating that copyright can be granted for the collective arrangement of AI-generated components [2]. Popular AI platforms [5], such as Midjourney [5], offer features that enable users to control the selection and arrangement of creative elements [5], potentially leading to copyrightable outputs [5]. The distinction made by the Copyright Office between prompts and inpainting has been criticized as misleading [5], as inpainting also involves prompt engineering that allows for targeted revisions [5].
AI companies face challenges regarding copyright infringement when their systems produce works that are substantially similar to existing protected works [6], particularly if those works were used without permission during the AI’s training process [6]. If an AI-generated work infringes on a registered copyright [6], the original copyright owner can pursue statutory damages against both the AI provider and the user who prompted the creation of the infringing work [6]. Current legal precedents support the notion of Fair Use in the context of teaching AI systems using publicly available information [6], even if that information is copyrighted [6]. This principle has been upheld in previous cases involving mass digitization and web crawling [6], where the courts recognized the educational value and transformative nature of such activities [6].
Although the courts have not yet ruled on AI-prompt engineered works [5], ongoing litigation [5], including a lawsuit by Jason Allen challenging the Copyright Office’s previous stance [5], highlights the evolving landscape of copyright in relation to AI. Invoke’s copyright application was initially denied due to insufficient human authorship but was later approved after the submission of additional evidence [5], including a workflow video that illustrated the creative process behind the image [3]. This documentation demonstrated that the combination of AI elements into a unified image reflected sufficient creative authorship for copyright registration [3]. The CEO emphasized the need for clarity in copyright protection for artistic work produced with emerging tools [3], enabling customers to confidently incorporate AI into their production workflows [3]. However, uncertainties remain regarding the copyright implications when AI replicates an artist’s style or uses an individual’s likeness [1], which may necessitate new legal frameworks [1], such as federal anti-impersonation legislation [1], to protect artists and individuals in these scenarios [1]. The ongoing debate regarding the adequacy of existing legal frameworks in addressing the complexities introduced by advancements in artificial intelligence has led to numerous active lawsuits in this area.
The Copyright Office has released a report addressing copyright issues related to artificial intelligence [7], specifically focusing on the copyrightability of AI-generated content [7]. It concludes that AI-generated works can be eligible for copyright protection if there is sufficient human contribution [7]. The report emphasizes that copyright law does not require updates to accommodate this finding [7]. According to established legal principles [7], a work is copyrightable when a human translates an idea into a tangible form [7]. If an AI model generates content without human creative input [7], it cannot be considered copyrightable [7], as no human author exists in that scenario [7].
In cases where a human’s creative expression is assisted by AI [7], the human is recognized as the author [7]. This situation is likened to joint authorship [7], where a work can be copyright-eligible even if not created solely by one individual [7]. The level of human contribution is critical; merely providing a prompt to an AI is insufficient for authorship [7]. This is compared to hiring an artist [7], where the artist executes the creative vision [7]. The report also notes that due to the opaque nature of AI models [7], users typically lack the control necessary to claim authorship [7]. However, when a user combines their original work with AI-generated output [7], the resulting creation can be copyrightable [7], as the human input helps shape the AI’s output [7].
Furthermore, AI-generated content may be copyrightable if it is arranged or modified through human creativity [7]. For instance [2] [7], while an AI-generated image alone may not qualify for copyright [7], a compilation of such images along with a human-authored narrative can be protected [7]. The Copyright Office is preparing a third part of the report [7], which will explore the implications of using copyrighted works to train AI models [7].
Conclusion
The US Copyright Office’s decision to allow copyright protection for AI-assisted works, contingent on significant human contribution, represents a crucial development in copyright law. This policy change acknowledges the evolving role of AI in creative processes and provides a framework for protecting works that integrate AI-generated content. However, it also raises questions about the adequacy of existing legal frameworks to address the complexities introduced by AI, highlighting the need for ongoing legal and policy discussions.
References
[1] https://www.creativebloq.com/ai/us-copyright-ruling-finally-provides-clarity-on-ai-art-kind-of
[2] https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/this-company-got-a-copyright-for-an-image-made-entirely-with-ai-heres-how/
[3] https://petapixel.com/2025/02/12/this-is-the-first-ever-ai-image-to-be-granted-copyright-protection-a-slice-of-american-cheese/
[4] https://natlawreview.com/article/copyright-office-says-ai-generated-works-based-text-prompts-are-not-protected
[5] https://chatgptiseatingtheworld.com/2025/02/11/ai-generated-image-received-copyright-registration-based-on-selection-coordination-and-arrangement-yes-in-the-united-states-how/
[6] https://guides.library.txstate.edu/c.php?g=1339505&p=10761450
[7] https://natlawreview.com/article/enough-human-contribution-ai-generated-outputs-may-be-copyright-protectable
