The algorithmic muse and the public domain: Why copyrights legal philosophy precludes protection for generative AI outputs
By: Ezieddin Elmahjub
Generative AI (GenAI) outputs are not copyrightable. This article argues why. We bypass conventional doctrinal analysis that focuses on black letter law notions of originality and authorship to re-evaluate copyright's foundational philosophy. GenAI fundamentally severs the direct human creative link to expressive form. Traditional theories utilitarian incentive, labor desert and personality fail to provide coherent justification for protection. The public domain constitutes the default baseline for intellectual creations. Those seeking copyright coverage for GenAI outputs bear the burden of proof. Granting copyright to raw GenAI outputs would not only be philosophically unsound but would also trigger an unprecedented enclosure of the digital commons, creating a legal quagmire and stifling future innovation. The paper advocates for a clear distinction: human creative contributions to AI-generated works may warrant protection, but the raw algorithmic output should remain in the public domain.
Similar Papers
Who Owns the Knowledge? Copyright, GenAI, and the Future of Academic Publishing
Digital Libraries
Protects artists' work from being used to train AI.
Unfair Learning: GenAI Exceptionalism and Copyright Law
Computers and Society
AI can't copy art without paying for it.
We Are All Creators: Generative AI, Collective Knowledge, and the Path Towards Human-AI Synergy
Artificial Intelligence
AI creates new things by copying patterns.