The US Supreme Court has declined to review a case challenging whether AI-generated art can receive copyright protection, effectively upholding a lower court ruling that human authorship is required. The decision came after Stephen Thaler, a Missouri computer scientist, appealed a federal appeals court ruling that found his algorithm-created image 'A Recent Entrance to Paradise' cannot be copyrighted.

The Copyright Office had previously rejected Thaler's 2019 request to copyright the image, determining it lacked human authorship. In 2023, US District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell affirmed that human authorship is a bedrock requirement of copyright. Thaler argued the ruling created a chilling effect on creative AI use, but the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case leaves the lower court's decision intact.

The ruling aligns with broader intellectual property trends regarding AI. The US Patent Office issued guidance in 2024 stating AI systems cannot be listed as inventors on patents, though humans can use AI tools in developing inventions. The UK Supreme Court reached a similar conclusion in Thaler's patent case. Last year, the Copyright Office issued new guidance clarifying that AI-generated artwork based on text prompts isn't protected by copyright.