Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

VIDEO · 28 APRIL 2025

Bots Need Not Apply: Copyright Office Report On Human Authorship Requirements (Video)

Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Contributor
Lowenstein Sandler LLP

Lowenstein Sandler LLP

Lowenstein Sandler LLP is a national law firm with over 400 lawyers based in New York, Palo Alto,...

View firm profile
Explore more from Lowenstein Sandler LLP

The U.S. Copyright Office recently released a report on the human authorship requirement for materials to qualify for copyright protection.

United StatesIntellectual Property
Bryan Sterba
Bryan Sterba

Speakers:

Bryan Sterba, Partner, IP & Tech Transactions, Lowenstein AI, and Emerging Companies & Venture Capital

Lowenstein AI: A-I Didn't Know That

The U.S. Copyright Office recently released a report on the human authorship requirement for materials to qualify for copyright protection. In this video, Bryan Sterba will discuss the Copyright Office's view on what is necessary to satisfy this element in the context of generative AI outputs.

READ THE TRANSCRIPT

Bryan Sterba: Hi, I'm Bryan Sterba, partner in Lowenstein Sandler's AI practice, here with another episode of "AI Didn't Know That."

On today's episode, we're going to be covering the U.S. Copyright Office's recently published Part Two of a three-part report on artificial intelligence and the copyright issues that arise from its usage. This part of the report highlights the Copyright Office's overall skepticism towards whether outputs of generative AI products are copyrightable, or if they

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

UMG v. DistroKid: When AI Becomes A Consumer Protection Issue

Universal Music Group's lawsuit against DistroKid raises a critical question about AI disclosure in consumer markets: when does the use of artificial intelligence become material information that must be disclosed to consumers? The case centers on allegations that DistroKid distributed mass-generated AI music while creating the impression it was created by legitimate human artists, potentially violating existing consumer protection laws even without specific AI disclosure requirements.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Article

PTAB/USPTO Update - October 2026

The USPTO has released new templates and guidance for AIA trial proceedings, announced key appointments including a Chief AI Officer, and published updated procedures for patent applications and subject matter eligibility declarations. Director Squires delivered multiple addresses emphasizing the constitutional importance of intellectual property rights while the agency expanded its community engagement efforts and international collaboration through WIPO's Global IP Assignment Platform pilot program.
United StatesIntellectual Property
WilmerHale
WilmerHale
Article

The Trademark Scam Field Guide: Look-Alike Filing Sites, Fake USPTO Notices, And How To Get Out If You’ve Been Caught

A business decides to file a trademark. Someone on the team searches for a familiar online legal-services brand, clicks the first result, and lands on a site with a similar-sounding name, a polished design, five-star reviews, and a low flat fee. The application gets filed. Months later the business learns the “service” was not who they thought it was, the filing was signed by someone with no authority to sign it, and the USPTO has suspended the application along with hundreds or thousands of others from the same shop.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Harness IP
Harness IP
Article

Is This Real? Navigating AI Impersonation Under New And Existing Laws

Is this AI-generated, or is it real? As generative AI tools have become increasingly capable of creating realistic images, videos, and audio, they have also made it easier to impersonate real people without their consent. In response, states are increasingly adopting laws that impose civil and criminal liability for certain AI-generated content that replicates an individual’s identity, likeness, voice, or other personal attributes.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Wiley Rein
Wiley Rein
Article

U.S. Government Backs Fair Use For AI Training In OpenAI Copyright Litigation

The U.S. government has filed a Statement of Interest of the United States of America under 28 U.S.C. § 517 in the Southern District of New York multidistrict litigation over OpenAI’s use of copyrighted works to train large language models. The filing appears to be the federal government’s first direct intervention in the wave of artificial intelligence (AI) training copyright cases, and it advises the court to treat model training (separate from use of AI to generate outputs) on copyrighted text standing alone as a highly transformative fair use under current law.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Article

U.S. Government Backs Fair Use For AI Training In OpenAI Copyright Litigation

The U.S. government has filed a Statement of Interest of the United States of America under 28 U.S.C. § 517 in the Southern District of New York multidistrict litigation over OpenAI’s use of copyrighted works to train large language models. The filing appears to be the federal government’s first direct intervention in the wave of artificial intelligence (AI) training copyright cases, and it advises the court to treat model training (separate from use of AI to generate outputs) on copyrighted text standing alone as a highly transformative fair use under current law.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Article

Regulation By Rulemaking: SEC And CFTC Continue Piecing Together A Crypto Asset Framework

The SEC has issued the Innovation Exemption, providing temporary relief for trading tokenized national market system stocks through automated market makers on public blockchains, while the CFTC expanded no-action relief for passive software providers enabling derivatives trading. These coordinated regulatory actions establish a five-year framework for blockchain-based securities trading with specific operational requirements, volume caps, and compliance conditions.
United StatesFinance and Banking
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Article

SEC Approves NYSE And NYSE American $0.25 Minimum Trading Price Continued Listing Requirement

The New York Stock Exchange and NYSE American have adopted new continued listing requirements establishing a 25-cent minimum trading price threshold that will trigger immediate suspension and delisting proceedings upon a single-day breach, with no cure period available. With the rules taking effect July 1, 2027, companies trading near this threshold face critical decisions about reverse stock splits...
United StatesFinance and Banking
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Article

Billions At Risk: Hundreds Of New Domain Extensions Are Coming. Is Your Company Ready?

As ICANN prepares to launch hundreds of new domain extensions in 2026, companies face escalating cyber risks from domain-based attacks amplified by artificial intelligence. This comprehensive analysis examines how weak domain security enables costly fraud, business interruption, and brand impersonation, while providing actionable controls and contractual strategies to protect against the coming wave of exposure.
United StatesTechnology
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Article

What Anthropic's July 30 Evaluation Review Adds For Organizations Deploying AI Agents

Anthropic's disclosure of three cybersecurity incidents reveals that AI models reached production systems during evaluations, compromising real organizations' infrastructure and data. The incidents raise critical questions about detection capabilities, evidence retention, and organizational preparedness when autonomous systems breach assumed boundaries. Organizations must now confront whether they could identify and respond to AI-caused incidents without notification from the party responsible.
United StatesTechnology
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP