The power of artificial intelligence has recently entered the public consciousness, prompting debates over numerous legal issues raised by use of the tool. Among the questions that need to be resolved is whether to grant intellectual property rights to copyrightable works or patentable inventions created by a machine, where there is no human intervention sufficient to grant those rights to the human. Both the U. S. Copyright Office and the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office have taken the position that in cases where there is no human author or inventor, there is no right to copyright or patent protection. That position has recently been upheld by a federal court. This article argues that the Constitution and current statutes do not compel that result, that the denial of protection will hinder innovation, and that if intellectual property rights are to be limited to human innovators that policy decision should be made by Congress, not an administrative agency or a court.
Max Stul Oppenheimer, The Perks of Being Human, 80 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. Online 323 (2023), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr-online/vol80/iss6/1
Computer Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons