Source: Lexology

Jason Allen’s appeal against the US Copyright Office (USCO) has reignited debates about whether AI-assisted art can qualify for copyright protection. Allen’s artwork, created using the AI tool Midjourney, was denied copyright registration on the grounds that it lacked sufficient human authorship.

The USCO ruled that copyright law requires a human creator and that works with “more than a de minimis amount” of AI-generated content must disclose and disclaim the AI’s contributions. Allen’s refusal to disclaim the AI-generated portions of his work led to its rejection.

In his appeal, Allen argues that his creative role—choosing prompts, refining outputs, and editing the final image—satisfies the human authorship requirement. He further claims that the USCO’s decision fails to acknowledge the evolving role of AI as a tool in creative processes.

This case highlights the tension between traditional copyright frameworks and modern AI technologies. It underscores the need for updated legal definitions of authorship to address collaborations between humans and AI. A ruling in Allen’s favor could reshape how copyright law applies to AI-assisted works.