AI Bucking Copyright Laws in Creative Pursuits?
In the ever-evolving world of technology, the issue of artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright law has become a hot topic. This article explores the current legal landscape and recent developments in this area.
The European Union's AI Act, or the AI Act, has established specific obligations for providers of general-purpose AI models regarding copyright. The bill proposes that the use of protected works by AI should be subject to the prior authorization of authors or rights holders. It also suggests a taxation project for the developer company of the tool for works whose origin can be determined.
In the United States, the legal status of AI-generated works is clear: purely AI-generated works are not eligible for copyright protection because they lack human authorship. This is a fundamental requirement under U.S. copyright law, as confirmed by the U.S. Copyright Office and recent court rulings. However, using copyrighted materials to train large language models (LLMs) may qualify as fair use, provided it is transformative and does not harm the market for the original works.
Internationally, the question of authorship can differ. Some countries may attribute copyright to the human who arranged for the creation of the work, but the U.S. standard emphasizes direct human authorship.
The recent case of The New York Times suing Microsoft and OpenAI for unauthorized use of its articles to train their AI models highlights the ongoing debate. Universal Music Group has also asked music platforms to prevent AI systems from training using copyrighted music, representing artists such as Drake and The Weeknd.
The question of who holds the rights to AI creations is a challenge for the legislator. Originality, defined as the mark of the intellectual contribution of the author, is a criterion for a work to be considered protectable under copyright law. The painting "Portrait of Edmond de Belamy," created by AI, was sold for $432,500 in October 2018.
AI creations also raise questions about the protection of authors' rights due to their inspiration from existing human-created works often protected by copyright. To ensure transparency, the bill aims to require AI developers to mention that the work was generated by AI and to mention the authors of the works that inspired the AI.
Providers of general-purpose AI models must implement a policy aimed at respecting copyright as defined in the EU, including identifying and respecting expressed rights reserves. This includes drafting and making available to the public a sufficiently detailed summary of the content used for the development of the general-purpose AI model.
Recent disputes, such as Getty Images' complaint against Stability AI for abusive use of over 12 million photos to train its AI image generation system, Stable Diffusion, highlight the potential problems and disputes that can arise from the unauthorized use of data, often protected by copyright, to train AI models.
AI Midjourney, capable of creating works of art from a textual description or prompt, is just one example of the innovative potential of AI. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, it will be interesting to see how these issues are addressed in the future.
[1] Thaler v. Perlmutter (2023) [2] Kadrey v. Meta (2025) [3] Bartz v. Anthropic (2025) [4] U.S. Copyright Office [5] The New York Times v. Microsoft and OpenAI (2025)
- The European Union's AI Act proposes that the use of protected works by AI should be subject to the prior authorization of authors or rights holders, indicating a shift towards innovation in copyright law to accommodate the ever-evolving world of technology.
- As AI technology continues to advance, the use of AI-generated works in various fields, such as art and music, raises questions about authorship and copyright, leading to ongoing disputes and the need for innovation in legal frameworks to address these issues effectively.
