- The Copyright Office has rejected an application seeking recognition of an artificial intelligence (AI) system as the author of an artwork, stating that DABUS cannot be treated as an author under Indian copyright law.
- The order, passed on August 31 by Registrar of Copyrights Unnat P Pandit, relates to US-based computer scientist Stephen L Thaler's application for registration of the artistic work 'A Recent Entrance to Paradise'.
- While rejecting the application in its existing form, the Copyright Office held that the artwork itself crossed the statutory threshold of originality under Section 13 of the Copyright Act, but DABUS could not be its legal author.
- The ruling turns on Section 2(d)(vi), which provides that for a computer-generated artistic work, the author is the person who causes the work to be created.
- The Copyright Office concluded that Thaler had an immediate and sufficient nexus with the creation of the specific work and was therefore the person who caused it to be created under Section 2(d)(vi).
- The Copyright Office stated that the register must record what the Copyright Act requires, rather than what an applicant considers desirable or more informative.
- The final order records that the artwork satisfies the originality threshold, DABUS cannot be recognised as its author, and Thaler is the legally recognised person who caused its creation.
- The Copyright Office found that the particular visual composition contained at least the minimal degree of expressive creativity required by Eastern Book Co.
- The Copyright Office clarified that the rejection does not preclude Thaler from pursuing such remedy as may be available in law on the basis of particulars correctly identifying the author and the corresponding basis of ownership.
- The Copyright Office also rejected the argument that DABUS's autonomous operation made it the author, stating that autonomy in execution is not the same as conception of a work.
- The Copyright Office noted that, during the hearing, the applicant was given an opportunity to correct the entry against 'author', but declined to amend the entry and continued to maintain DABUS as author.
The Indian Copyright Office has ruled against recognizing DABUS, an AI system, as an author under Section 2(d)(vi) of the Copyright Act. The Registrar emphasized that authorship must be attributed to a legally recognized person, in this case, Dr. Stephen L. Thaler, who played a crucial role in the creation of the artwork.4
The Copyright Office stated, “Whether legal personhood or authorship should ever be extended to autonomous artificial intelligence remains a policy decision strictly reserved for Parliament.” This highlights the ongoing debate about the legal status of AI in creative fields.1
Despite rejecting DABUS as the author, the Copyright Office confirmed that the artwork 'A Recent Entrance to Paradise' met the originality requirement under Section 13, indicating it contained a “minimal degree of expressive creativity.” The work was deemed original due to its unique arrangement of visual elements, colors, and spatial relationships.28
The Registrar noted that Thaler had an “immediate nexus” with the creation of the work, having conceived and configured DABUS, and provided essential inputs for the artwork. The ruling clarified that DABUS's autonomous operation does not equate to authorship, as it operates within parameters set by Thaler.
The Copyright Office also addressed ownership issues, stating that Thaler's claim of ownership while designating DABUS as the author was inconsistent with Sections 17 to 19 of the Copyright Act. The ruling underscores the complexities of copyright law in the age of AI-generated content.
“The ruling turns on Section 2(d)(vi), which attributes authorship to 'the person who causes the work to be created,' and the Registrar found Thaler had an 'immediate nexus' with the work. Thaler declined to amend the author entry despite an opportunity, and the rejection does not preclude a future application with correct particulars.”
