By: Negar Bondari
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly reshaping industries, but it also raises complex legal questions—particularly in the realm of copyright law. In the past year, courts, legislators, and regulators have grappled with issues such as whether AI-generated content can be copyrighted, whether AI developers are liable for using copyrighted materials to train models, and how existing intellectual property (IP) laws should adapt to new technologies. These questions have significant implications for creatives, technology companies, and legal practitioners alike.
In the rapidly evolving landscape of artificial intelligence (AI), the intersection of AI and copyright law has become a focal point of legal discourse. Recent developments have highlighted the challenges and complexities in determining the ownership and protection of AI-generated content.
1. The Current Legal Landscape for AI-Generated Content
One of the most pressing issues is whether AI-generated works can be protected under copyright law. In August 2023, a district court in Washington D.C reaffirmed the U.S. Copyright Office’s stance that AI-generated content, in and of itself, cannot receive copyright protection.[1] Even though Thaler’s AI generated work met all requirements to receive copyright protection, “the court agreed with the Copyright Office that only human beings qualify as authors under U.S. copyright law, meaning that an AI-generated work like the one submitted by Thaler is not eligible for copyright protection”[2] The court emphasized that human creativity is a fundamental requirement for copyright eligibility. This decision aligns with previous U.S. Copyright Office rulings that have rejected AI-generated artwork applications. It also aligns with the broader principle that copyright protects the expression of ideas by humans, not the ideas themselves or works generated autonomously by machines. The U.S. Copyright Office has consistently maintained that human authorship is a prerequisite for copyright protection, a position that has been supported by recent court decisions.[3]
However, this ruling does not fully address the complexities of human-AI collaboration. The Copyright Office has clarified that if a human provides significant creative input—such as editing, arranging, or selecting AI-generated elements—a work might be eligible for copyright protection. The Office emphasizes that the extent of human involvement and the level of control exerted by human creators are crucial factors in determining the copyrightability of AI-assisted works.[4] But the line between human authorship and machine generation remains blurry, and future cases will likely refine this legal standard.
2. AI Training and Copyright Infringement: The Lawsuits Against Tech Giants
Beyond questions of authorship, significant legal challenges have emerged regarding the use of copyrighted materials in training AI models. Several high-profile lawsuits have been filed against companies like OpenAI, Meta, and Stability AI, alleging unauthorized use of copyrighted content to train their generative AI models.
For example, in Andersen v. Stability AI, a group of artists alleged that Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt scraped billions of images from the internet—including the plaintiffs’ copyrighted works—to train their AI image-generating platforms—such as Stable Diffusion, the Midjourney Product, DreamStudio, and DreamUp— without permission or compensation. The court found that plaintiffs’ allegations that Stability acquired copies of plaintiffs’ copyrighted works, used those works to train Stable Diffusion, and then stored or incorporated the training images derived from their works into Stable Diffusion as compressed copies were sufficient to plead direct infringement.[5]
Similarly, The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in December 2023, arguing that their large language models unlawfully incorporated the newspaper’s copyrighted articles into their training datasets. The lawsuit claims that the companies used millions of the newspaper’s articles without permission to help train chatbots to provide information to readers.[6]
These cases raise fundamental questions: Is the use of copyrighted materials for AI training covered under the fair use doctrine, or does it constitute infringement? Defendants argue that training AI models is analogous to human learning and that their actions fall under fair use because they do not directly copy and distribute the works in their original form. However, plaintiffs contend that AI-generated outputs often closely resemble existing copyrighted works, undermining the fair use argument.
The outcomes of these lawsuits could reshape how AI models are trained and whether companies must license materials from content creators. If courts rule against AI developers, companies may need to seek licensing agreements with publishers, artists, and other content owners, which could significantly impact the business models of AI firms.
3. Legislative Responses
In response to these legal battles, lawmakers have begun crafting legislation to address AI and copyright concerns. One such proposal is the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act of 2024, introduced in the U.S. Congress on April 9, 2024. This bill would require companies developing generative AI models to disclose the datasets used to train their systems, increasing transparency and potentially giving copyright owners more control over their works.[7]
Another legislative effort, the No AI FRAUD Act, introduced in 2024, which aims to prevent AI from being used to impersonate individuals without their consent. This could have implications for deepfake technology, particularly in the entertainment industry, where AI-generated performances are becoming more common.[8]
4. Global Perspectives: How Other Jurisdictions Are Handling AI and Copyright
While the U.S. is at the forefront of these legal battles, other countries are also tackling AI and copyright issues. As a result, the global landscape of AI and copyright law is evolving, with various jurisdictions adopting distinct approaches to address the complexities introduced by AI-generated content.
The European Union, for instance, is aiming to establish a comprehensive legal framework for AI technologies through the proposed AI Act. The AI Act introduces a risk-based approach to AI regulation, categorizing AI systems based on their potential risks and imposing corresponding obligations on providers and users. Notably, the Act includes provisions that require AI developers to maintain detailed records of training data, ensuring transparency and accountability in AI development and potentially setting a precedent for stricter copyright protections. This measure is designed to uphold existing copyright protections and promote responsible AI innovation. [9]Additionally, the AI Act acknowledges the importance of balancing copyright protection with the promotion of innovation and research. It introduces limited exceptions for text and data mining, recognizing the need for proportionality in compliance requirements, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), startups and non-profits. This provision aims to facilitate non-commercial research activities while ensuring that rightsholders’ interests are adequately protected. [10]
Meanwhile, in China, the legal framework surrounding AI-generated content is also developing. A landmark ruling by the Beijing Internet Court in November 2023 recognized copyright protection for an AI-generated image, provided that the work demonstrates originality and reflects a human’s intellectual effort.[11] This decision signifies a progressive stance toward acknowledging AI-assisted creations under Chinese copyright law. Furthermore, China’s regulatory approach mandates that AI-generated content must be clearly labeled, and AI companies are held liable for any misinformation or unlawful content produced by their models.[12] This stringent regulatory framework underscores China’s commitment to maintaining control over AI development and ensuring that AI technologies operate within the bounds of the law.
These strict regulations contrast with the more flexible approach in the U.S., where courts are still determining the extent to which AI should be held accountable under existing copyright laws.
5. Looking Ahead: The Future of AI and Copyright Law
As AI technology continues to evolve, legal frameworks will need to keep pace. Some key questions for the future include:
- Will courts set new fair use standards for AI training? If courts rule that training AI models with copyrighted content requires permission, this could reshape the AI industry by requiring licensing agreements.
- How will AI-human collaborations be treated under copyright law? The legal definition of “authorship” may expand to account for AI-assisted creativity.
- Will legislative efforts gain traction? Bills like the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act could establish new disclosure requirements for AI developers.
For lawyers, artists, tech companies, and policymakers, the intersection of AI and copyright law represents one of the most dynamic and consequential legal debates of our time. With landmark court cases and legislative efforts unfolding in real-time, staying informed is essential for anyone involved in IP and technology law.
Negar Bondari
[1] Thaler v. Perlmutter, 687 F. Supp. 3d 140 (D.D.C. 2023).
[2] Jones Day, Court Finds AI-Generated Work Not Copyrightable for Failure to Meet “Human Authorship” Requirement—But Questions Remain, Jones Day (Aug. 2023) https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2023/08/court-finds-aigenerated-work-not-copyrightable-for-failure-to-meet-human-authorship-requirementbut-questions-remain?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[3] See generally, What Does Copyright Protect?, Copyright.gov, https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[4] Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence, National Archives (Mar. 2023), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05321/copyright-registration-guidance-works-containing-material-generated-by-artificial-intelligence?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[5] Andersen v. Stability AI Ltd., 700 F. Supp. 3d 853 (N.D. Cal. 2023); see also, Kevin Madigan, Top Taleaways from Order in the Andersen v. Stability AI Copyright Case, Copyright Alliance (Aug. 2024), https://copyrightalliance.org/andersen-v-stability-ai-copyright-case/; Tal Dickstein & Edward Delman, Andersen v. Stability AI Ltd., Loeb&Leob LLP (Oct. 2023), https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2023/11/andersen-v-stability-ai-ltd?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
[6] Jonathan Stempel, NY Times sues OpenAI, Microsoft for infringing copyrighted works, Ruters (Dec. 2023), https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/ny-times-sues-openai-microsoft-infringing-copyrighted-work-2023-12-27/?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
[7] Ewerton Barroso, New Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act of 2024 Introduced, BYU (Apr. 2024) https://copyright.byu.edu/new-generative-ai-copyright-disclosure-act-of-2024-introduced.
[8] Salazar Introduces the No AI Fraud Act (Jan. 2024), https://salazar.house.gov/media/press-releases/salazar-introduces-no-ai-fraud-act.
[9] EU AI Act: first regulation on artificial intelligence, Topics European Parliament (Jun 2024), https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
[10] EU AI Act: shaping Copyright compliance in the age of AI Innovation, KEA (Mar. 2024), https://keanet.eu/eu-ai-act-shaping-copyright-compliance-in-the-age-of-ai-innovation/?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
[11] Yuqian Wang & Jessie Zhang, Beijing Internet Court Grants Copyright to AI-Generated Image for the First Time, Wolters Kluwer (Feb. 2024), https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2024/02/02/beijing-internet-court-grants-copyright-to-ai-generated-image-for-the-first-time/?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
[12] Cheryl Yu & Barbara Li, AI explained: AI regulations and PRC court decisions in China, ReedSmith (Oc. 2024), https://www.reedsmith.com/en/perspectives/2024/10/ai-explained-ai-regulations-and-prc-court-decisions-in-china?utm_source=chatgpt.com.