"An "anonymous work" is a work on the copies or phonorecords of which no natural person is identified as author. 17 U.S.C. § 101. If Congress assumed every author must be a natural person, why would it need to define a category of works where no natural person is identified? That textual puzzle sits at the heart of Stephen Thaler's newly filed reply brief in Thaler v. Perlmutter, No. 25-449, which asks the Supreme Court to take up whether AI-generated works can receive copyright protection. The case has been distributed for the Court's February 27, 2026, conference."
"SCOTUSGate: Supreme Court Petition Tracker I have created a new website: SCOTUSGate ( scotusgate.com), a tool for tracking petitions for certiorari at the Supreme Court. The site aggregates docket entries, briefing schedules, conference dates, and amicus filings for pending petitions. Cases can be browsed by topic, court of origin, or conference date."
A statutory definition labels an "anonymous work" as one where no natural person is identified as author, creating a textual puzzle about whether Congress assumed every author must be a natural person. Stephen Thaler filed a reply brief in Thaler v. Perlmutter, No. 25-449, requesting the Supreme Court to consider whether AI-generated works are eligible for copyright protection. The case has been distributed for the Court's February 27, 2026 conference. A new website, SCOTUSGate, tracks certiorari petitions by aggregating docket entries, briefing schedules, conference dates, and amicus filings and includes a Thaler case page; the site is in Alpha and invites feedback.
Read at Patently-O
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]