Artist sues U.S. Copyright Office for not protecting copyright of his AI-generated image

Colorado artist Jason M. Allen is taking the U.S. Copyright Office to court over its decision to deny copyright protection for his AI-generated artwork.

If Allen’s name sounds familiar, his AI-generated image Theatre D’opera Spatial won a Colorado State Fair art competition in 2022, sparking huge controversy. He tried to protect the rights of his image, but the U.S. Copyright Office denied it — and the lawsuit ensued. It claims that Allen should receive copyright protection for his image because “the Work possesses a large degree of creativity.

According to Reuters, a spokesperson for the Copyright Office declined to comment, citing pending litigation. The same source cites Allen, who said the office’s decision “put me in a terrible position, with no recourse against others who are blatantly and repeatedly stealing my work.”

The Copyright Office’s stance has been that AI-generated works can’t be copyrighted unless they demonstrate a significant amount of human authorship. Allen, however, contends that his creative input in developing the prompt and altering the image with Photoshop qualifies as human authorship.

“Mr. Allen had a specific artistic idea, conceived of in his mind, and he used Midjourney as a tool to create an artistic expression of that idea,” the lawsuit reads. “Such creative input is on par with that expressed by other types of artists and is capable of copyright protection.”

AI copyright has been a hot topic for the past couple of years, considering that AI image and video generators are becoming increasingly popular (and better). Earlier this year, talks between artists and AI companies stalled due to disagreements over the use of copyrighted material for training AI models. This left artists without protection from AI companies that want to use their work without permission and proper compensation.

I’m sure that this isn’t the last case of AI-related copyright. Its outcome could have significant implications for the future of AI-generated art and copyright law. If Allen is successful, it could set a precedent for recognizing AI-generated works as eligible for copyright protection, opening up new possibilities for artists and AI developers. But what happens with photographers and other artists whose work was used to train AI? I guess it’s not going to be easy for either.

[via Reuters; image AI-generated using Ideogram]

---