Key holding or allegation
The D.C. Circuit held that copyrightable works must be authored in the first instance by a human being.
Why it matters
Final federal appellate authority establishing the human-authorship requirement for a work presented as autonomously AI-created.
Facts
Applicant sought registration for a work identified as autonomously created by an AI system with the AI named as author.
Issues before the court
Whether a non-human AI system can be the statutory author of a copyrighted work.
What the court did not decide
The D.C. Circuit expressly did not decide copyrightability where a human uses AI as a creative tool and claims authorship of human contributions.
Procedural timeline
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Merits judgment: District court upheld Copyright Office refusal to register a work presented as autonomously created by an AI system, applying the human-authorship requirement.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Appellate merits judgment: D.C. Circuit affirmed that copyrightable works must be authored in the first instance by a human being.
U.S. Supreme Court
Certiorari denied: Supreme Court denied certiorari, leaving the D.C. Circuit human-authorship ruling in place.