Supreme Court Upholds Ruling: AI-Generated Art Ineligible for Copyright

The United States Supreme Court has opted not to review a case concerning the copyright eligibility of AI-generated art, effectively maintaining the stance that such creations cannot be copyrighted. This decision follows an appeal by Stephen Thaler, a computer scientist from Missouri, who sought to challenge a previous ruling that denied copyright protection for an image produced by his algorithm.

In 2019, Thaler attempted to secure a copyright for an image titled "A Recent Entrance to Paradise," created by an AI algorithm he developed. The US Copyright Office rejected this request, citing the absence of "human authorship" as the basis for its decision. This determination was reaffirmed in 2022 after a review by the Copyright Office, which concluded that the lack of human involvement in the creation process disqualified the work from copyright protection.

Thaler's subsequent appeal led to a 2023 ruling by US District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell, who emphasized that "human authorship is a bedrock requirement of copyright." This ruling was upheld in 2025 by a federal appeals court in Washington, DC. Thaler then petitioned the Supreme Court in October 2025, arguing that the ruling could deter others from using AI in creative endeavors. However, the Supreme Court's decision not to hear the case leaves the lower court's ruling intact.

In addition to this case, the US Copyright Office issued new guidance last year, clarifying that AI-generated artwork based on text prompts does not qualify for copyright protection. This guidance aligns with the broader legal perspective that AI systems, lacking human agency, cannot hold copyrights.

Thaler has made multiple attempts to secure intellectual property rights for AI-generated outputs, including efforts to patent inventions created by AI. However, the US federal circuit court has similarly ruled that AI systems cannot be credited as inventors on patents due to their non-human status. This position was reiterated by the US Patent Office in 2024, which stated that while AI systems cannot be listed as inventors, they can be used as tools in the development of inventions by humans. The UK Supreme Court has also reached a similar conclusion in a related case brought by Thaler.