Supreme Court Declines Review, AI-Generated Art Ineligible for Copyright

According to earlier reports from Reuters, the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a case regarding whether art generated by artificial intelligence is eligible for copyright protection. This Monday's ruling follows an appeal by Stephen Thaler, a computer scientist from Missouri, who challenged a lower court decision maintaining that AI-created art cannot be copyrighted.

Back in 2019, the U.S. Copyright Office rejected Thaler's request to register copyright for an image titled "A Recent Entrance to Paradise," which was created by an algorithm he developed. Upon reviewing the decision in 2022, the Office determined that the image lacked "human authorship," thereby disqualifying it from copyright protection.

Following Thaler's appeal, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled in 2023 that "human authorship is a fundamental requirement for copyright." This decision was subsequently upheld by the Federal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 2025. Reuters reported that Thaler petitioned the Supreme Court to review the ruling in October 2025, arguing that the decision created a "chilling effect on others considering creative uses of artificial intelligence."

Last year, the Copyright Office issued new guidance stating that AI-generated artworks based on text prompts are not protected by copyright.

The Supreme Court's decision comes after Thaler made multiple attempts to secure copyright and patent protection for outputs from his AI system. Similarly, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that AI systems cannot apply for patents for inventions since they are not human. The U.S. Patent Office reaffirmed this in 2024 through new guidelines, noting that while AI systems cannot be listed as patent inventors, humans may still use AI-driven tools to develop inventions. The UK Supreme Court also issued a similar ruling in a case brought by Thaler.