Tada Images / Shutterstock.com
The use of generative AI tools has led to questions over the copyrightability of certain outputs as well as publicity rights issues, say Bryan Sterba, Matt Savare and Chloe Rippe of Lowenstein Sandler.
Courts have yet to articulate how copyright authorship standards should adapt to partially generated artificial intelligence (GAI) works. Yet, that has not stopped technologists from testing the legal boundaries.
Litigation is pending between physicist Stephen Thaler and the US Copyright Register over whether he can or cannot claim copyright to a GAI-generated work.
In his registration application, Thaler stated that the machine was the author, but purported to transfer ownership to himself under the work made for hire doctrine.
The rest of this article is locked for subscribers only. Please login to continue reading.
If you don't have a login, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content. Please use this link and follow the steps.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription to us that we can add you to for FREE, please email Atif Choudhury at email@example.com
Lowenstein Sandler, generative AI, copyright authorship, artificial intelligence, Midjourney, infringement, derivative works