All or Nothin? What Can and Cannot be Protected by US Copyright in the Age of AI by Michele S. Katz

All or Nothin? What Can and Cannot be Protected by US Copyright in the Age of AI by Michele S. Katz, Founding Partner at Advitam IP LLC, USA In The Global IP Matrix Issue 22, Michele S. Katz, Founding Partner at Advitam IP LLC, USA, explores one of the most pressing questions in modern IP law: how copyright protection applies to creative works in the age of artificial intelligence. With AI tools now capable of generating text, music, images, and more, the boundaries of authorship are being tested like never before. This article, supported by research from Noa Siskind, provides clear guidance on the U.S. Copyright Office’s current position, placing human creativity firmly at the centre of copyright law.

The Human Element of Copyright

While AI tools can mimic creativity, the Copyright Office has reaffirmed that only human-generated work qualifies for copyright protection. Under Article I, § 8 of the U.S. Constitution, copyright law is built on the foundation of human authorship.

The courts have supported this view. In Thaler v. Perlmutter and Kelley v. Chicago Park District, the rulings consistently held that non-human entities cannot be credited with authorship. However, creators using AI in their workflow still have options, as long as human originality and creative decision-making are clearly present.

Disclosing AI Involvement: A Legal Necessity

To preserve the integrity of copyright, the U.S. Copyright Office requires creators to disclose which elements of a work were AI-generated and which were created by a human. Only the latter are eligible for protection.

For example, in the case of the graphic novel Zarya of the Dawn, the AI-generated images were excluded from copyright protection. However, the text and image arrangement created by a human author were granted protection, underscoring that human authorship still forms the legal core of copyright eligibility. Examples and Applications in Creative Work

An AI-assisted musician or writer may use machine-generated content as a starting point, but must ensure the final output is their own creative work. The law treats AI like any other tool: it can inspire, assist, or contribute, but it cannot replace the human author. This approach is especially important as AI tools become more advanced, blurring the line between facilitation and generation.

Maintaining Legal Integrity in a Tech-Driven World

By mandating AI disclosures and disallowing registration for machine-created content, the Copyright Office ensures transparency, fairness, and consistency. These steps also provide legal clarity for the growing number of creators integrating AI into their processes.

Conclusion As this article explains, the U.S. copyright system continues to evolve, but it has not compromised its core principle: to protect human creativity. AI may be a revolutionary tool, but it is not a replacement for authorship. By enforcing disclosure rules and demanding evidence of human input, the Copyright Office preserves both the purpose and power of copyright law in the digital age.

Read the full article in The Global IP Matrix Issue 22 to understand how creators can navigate the legal challenges of AI while protecting their intellectual contributions.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE NOW!