Artificial intelligence may be the author of copyright, according to Suit (1)

An artificial intelligence could be the proud author of copyrighted material if its creator wins a lawsuit against the US Copyright Office.

Stephen Thaler, president and CEO of Imagination Engines, sued the Copyright Office on Thursday, following the agency’s denial of Thaler’s copyright registration application on the grounds that the inventor’s AI-created work “lacks the necessary human authorship to support a copyright claim.”

This is the latest lawsuit filed by Thaler, which has sought to secure AI intellectual property rights worldwide, so far with limited success. On Monday, he will argue in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that patented inventors don’t need to be human.

“My interest is the definition of what a person is,” Thaler said in an interview with Bloomberg Law. “What I’m building, which many will say, is sentient artificial intelligence. So perhaps the extension to the term sensitive organism would be in order.

Thaler’s copyright lawsuit said its application for registration named an AI system known as the “Creativity Machine” as the author of a two-dimensional work of art titled “An Entrance recent in paradise”. He claimed ownership of the copyright in the work, citing the doctrine of work for pay.

“These two cases are legal test cases that are designed to help improve the discussion of what to do now that we have artificial intelligence that puts itself in people’s shoes and does human things,” said Ryan Abbott, a partner of Brown, Neri. , Smith & Khan LLP—representing Thaler.

The Copyright Office reviewed Thaler’s copyright application twice and refused to register it both times due to lack of human authorship. He also said that Thaler was not allowed to seek copyright registration for the work.

“The denial creates a new copyright registration requirement that is contrary to the plain language of copyright law, contrary to the statutory purpose of the law, and contrary to the constitutional mandate to promote the advancement of science,” according to the lawsuit.

“This case presents a next step in technical evolution and it is important that the law keeps pace,” Abbott said.

cause of action: Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

Relief: Order requiring the Copyright Office to rescind its refusal to register the work; reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses.

Answer: The Copyright Office was not immediately available for comment.

Brown, Neri, Smith & Khan LLP represents Thaler. The lawyers have yet to appear before the Copyright Office.

This case is Thaler versus PerlmutterSDC, n° 22-cv-01564, complaint filed on 02/06/22.