
The U.S. Copyright Office has issued comprehensive guidance on the copyrightability of AI-generated works, establishing that current copyright law is sufficient to address AI-related challenges while maintaining human authorship as a fundamental requirement for protection.
Key Points:
- AI-generated content without meaningful human input cannot be copyrighted
- Using AI as a creative tool does not disqualify works from copyright protection
- Simple text prompts alone are insufficient to claim copyright over AI outputs
In a detailed 41-page report, the Copyright Office addresses the intersection of artificial intelligence and copyright law, providing much-needed clarity for creators, businesses, and the legal community. The report, titled "Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 2: Copyrightability," emerges from an extensive consultation process that gathered over 10,000 public comments.
The Office maintains that existing copyright frameworks are well-equipped to handle AI-related challenges. When AI serves as a tool to assist human creativity - similar to how photographers use cameras or musicians use digital instruments - the resulting works remain eligible for copyright protection. However, the Office draws a clear line: content generated solely by AI systems, without substantial human creative input, falls outside copyright's scope.
Notably, the guidance clarifies that merely writing prompts for AI systems is typically insufficient to establish copyright claims. The Office explains that prompts essentially function as instructions conveying unprotectible ideas rather than creative expression. "The gaps between prompts and resulting outputs demonstrate that the user lacks control over the conversion of their ideas into fixed expression," the report states.
The new guidance builds on themes explored in Part 1: Digital Replicas, which the Copyright Office released in July 2024. That earlier report focused on the legal and ethical implications of AI-generated digital replicas, such as deepfakes or synthetic media, and how they intersect with existing copyright frameworks. Together, these reports offer a comprehensive view of how AI is reshaping copyright law while reinforcing human authorship as a cornerstone of protection.
The Office specifically addresses concerns about market competition and innovation, noting that additional copyright or sui generis protection for AI-generated content is unnecessary. It emphasizes that AI developers already benefit from various protections, including patents and copyrights for their software and systems.
For creators with disabilities, the Office affirms that using AI as an assistive tool to help realize their creative vision does not compromise copyright protection. The report cites a recent example where a sound recording by country artist Randy Travis, who has limited speech function, was registered for copyright protection because AI was used as a tool to realize his creative expression.
The Office plans to provide ongoing guidance through registration practices and updates to its Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices. While acknowledging that technology continues to evolve, the Office maintains that fundamental copyright principles - particularly the requirement for human authorship - remain sound and adaptable to emerging challenges in the AI era.
The report represents a balanced approach that preserves traditional copyright principles while recognizing AI's growing role in creative processes. It provides practical guidance for creators and businesses while ensuring that copyright law continues to serve its constitutional purpose of promoting human creativity and innovation.