Key holding or allegation
The appellate court found no sufficient basis for treating the AI output as a new human-authored work but also found no copyright infringement because only unprotected motif elements, not the photographer's protected creative expression, were reproduced.
Why it matters
Useful direct authority separating copyrightability of the AI output from infringement analysis of the source work.
Facts
A photograph was uploaded to an AI tool to create a new image involving a similar underwater dog motif.
Issues before the court
Whether the output was a new human-authored work and whether it reproduced protected expression from the source photograph.
What the court did not decide
Does not decide model training or broader AI image copyrightability beyond the specific evidentiary record.
Procedural timeline
OLG Dusseldorf
Appellate injunction judgment: AI-transformed underwater-dog image was not shown to be a new human-authored work, but also did not infringe the source photograph because only unprotected motif elements were reproduced.