Thaler v. Perlmutter — AI as Copyright Author Denied (D.C. Cir.)
D.C. Cir. · Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025)
The companion copyright case: Stephen Thaler sought to register a copyright with 'Creativity Machine' (his AI) as the author. The D.C. Circuit affirmed in March 2025 that the Copyright Act's human-authorship requirement is dispositive as a matter of statutory law. AI cannot be a copyright author under U.S. law.
Technical detail
Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025), aff'g 687 F. Supp. 3d 140 (D.D.C. 2023). Held: 17 U.S.C. § 102(a) requires human authorship; Copyright Office's denial of registration was correct. U.S. Copyright Office Part 1 (March 2025) and Part 2 (Jan. 2025) AI guidance applies the same rule and addresses human-AI hybrid works.
Who is protected: (Doctrinal — establishes that purely AI-generated works are uncopyrightable)
Who must comply: Copyright applicants before the U.S. Copyright Office and federal courts
Key facts
| Jurisdiction | D.C. Cir. |
|---|---|
| Level | Federal |
| Status | In effect |
| Protection strength | Stronger protection |
| Effective date | 2025-03-18 |
| Citation | Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025) |
| Topics | copyright and training data · AI disclosure and transparency |
| Last verified | 2026-06-17 |
| Official source | Thaler v. Perlmutter — CourtListener D.C. Cir. opinion ↗ |
Related copyright and training data rules elsewhere
- Hachette v. Google (Gemini AI copyright) · Blocked / in litigation
- Copyright Office AI Guidance · In effect
- USPTO AI Inventorship Guidance · Repealed / replaced
- NYT v. OpenAI / Microsoft · Blocked / in litigation
- Authors Guild v. OpenAI · Blocked / in litigation
- Tremblay v. OpenAI · Blocked / in litigation
See something wrong or out of date? Submit a correction — every entry must carry a verifiable official source.