The US Supreme Court declined to hear a case seeking copyright protection for artwork created entirely by artificial intelligence, leaving intact rulings that limit US copyright to works authored by humans.
The dispute centred on computer scientist Stephen Thaler, who applied in 2018 for copyright protection for “A Recent Entrance to Paradise,” an image generated by his AI system known as DABUS.
“Pretty much everyone across the board has said human authorship is required, and AI doesn’t have human authorship, whatever we mean by that,”
Said University of Kentucky law professor, Brian Fyre.
Lower courts had upheld the US Copyright Office’s rejection of Thaler’s application, with a federal judge ruling in 2023 that US law protects only works with human authorship and the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirming that decision in 2025.
Thaler’s petition argued that the Copyright Office had improperly narrowed the law in a way that failed to accommodate technological progress, but the Supreme Court’s refusal to grant review ends his appeal in the case.
“It was disappointing, but the Supreme Court does generally wait for circuit splits to develop before taking on such legal issues,”
Said Thaler’s attorney, Ryan Abbott.
For now, US courts continue to treat AI as a tool rather than a legal creator, though legal experts expect further challenges to emerge as disputes arise involving plaintiffs with clearer economic interests in AI-generated works.