There is a heated debate about whether Works Created by generative artificial intelligence are copyrightable. Some judges have decided, "No, of course that is unreasonable." Some argue to the contrary. On Friday the computer received L.

again. A federal judge ruled that the US findings were unwarranted. The Copyright Office says that works of art Created by AI are not copyrightable. As noted by The Hollywood Reporter, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell, who rendered the ruling, said that copyright law "has never protected works created by new forms of technology that function without human guidance." I didn't," he said. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Steven Thaler, CEO of neural network firm Imagination Engines, is leading the hope of writing lyrics for AI productions. In his lawsuit, he argued that AI "should be credited as authorship if it meets the authorship criteria," and that works entirely and solely produced by artificial intelligence are protected by copyright law. argued that it should.

"If there is no human involvement in the creation of the work, the Registry's clear and direct answer is no," writes Howell, noting that copyright "only protects works created by humans." added.

But everything is still a little confusing. In March, the U.S. Copyright Office issued a voluntary guideline saying it was willing to grant protection and ownership of AI-generated works on a "case-by-case" basis. Basically, if something is created entirely by AI, it cannot be copyrighted. If it's created by humans using AI, it can be copyrighted.