Government Urges Supreme Court to Deny AI Copyright Case, Emphasizing Narrow Question and Statutory Text

"The Solicitor General has filed a brief urging the Supreme Court to deny certiorari in Thaler v. Perlmutter, the case testing whether artificial intelligence can be recognized as an author under copyright law. The government's opposition takes a notably restrained approach, relying entirely on statutory interpretation while avoiding the policy arguments about innovation incentives and economic impact that have dominated public discourse. The brief includes a strategic reframing of the question presented -- attempting to narrow the case its unusual facts while leaving open the genuinely difficult questions about human-AI collaboration that will define copyright's future in the near term. Brief for the Respondents in Opposition, Thaler v. Perlmutter, No. 25-449 (U.S. Jan. 2026)."

"The case arises from computer scientist Stephen Thaler's application to register copyright in "A Recent Entrance to Paradise," a visual artwork generated by his AI system called the "Creativity Machine." Thaler's application listed the Creativity Machine as the sole author and stated the work was "created autonomously by machine" without any human creative contribution."

"The rule requires only that the author of that work be a human being-the person who created, operated, or used artificial intelligence-and not the machine itself."

Solicitor General urged the Supreme Court to deny certiorari in Thaler v. Perlmutter, a case testing whether artificial intelligence can be recognized as an author under copyright law. The government's opposition rests solely on statutory interpretation and sidesteps broader policy debates about innovation incentives and economic impact. The brief narrows the question to the case's unusual facts while leaving open difficult questions about human-AI collaboration that will shape future copyright law. The dispute arises from Stephen Thaler's application claiming the Creativity Machine as sole author of a visual artwork created autonomously by machine. The government's framing appears more permissive toward AI-assisted works than recent Copyright Office decisions.

Read at Patently-O