Artists vs. AI For Image Copyright
As artificial intelligence rapidly transforms creative industries, the debate over image copyright has intensified, especially between human artists and AI-generated content. Traditional artists argue that their originality and labor deserve legal protection, while AI tools—trained on vast datasets that often include copyrighted works—blur the lines between inspiration and infringement. This evolving conflict raises urgent questions: Who owns AI-generated images? Can algorithms truly create art? And how should copyright law adapt to protect creativity in a digital age?
Here are the points made regarding this topic:
AI Copyright Defendant:
The generated artwork is an inspiration and therefore it cannot be copyrighted as long as it is referenced. For example, Henrik Ibsen’s play ‘‘A Doll’s House’’ is based on the life of Laura Smith Petersen and Ibsen has credited/referenced her in the printed and on-the-market version.
AI creates images from scratch. For example, if an image of an orange is generated based on a request, AI looks at many oranges and makes the best combination. Humans also rely on previous work and make their ‘‘own’’ version of it. Humans also look at thousands of oranges before it is able to draw an orange from scratch.
AI merely takes inspiration from previous artist work and does not directly copy; therefore, it cannot be subject to copyright.
Artist Copyright Defendant:
Allowing AI to own copyright would devalue artistic incentives.
Overall, The Scientific Debate Club argued that AI should own the copyright.
Resources
Hals, Tom, and Blake Brittain. “Humans vs. Machines: The Fight to Copyright AI Art.” Reuters, 1 Apr. 2023, www.reuters.com/default/humans-vs-machines-fight-copyright-ai-art-2023-04-01/
Brittain, Blake. “Artist Sues after US Rejects Copyright for AI-Generated Image.” Reuters, 26 Sept. 2024,www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/artist-sues-after-us-rejects-copyright-ai-generated-image-2024-09-26/.
Sookman, B. B. (2025, February 15). AI Copyright: Understanding recent reports and
implications. Lexology. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=27e675b6-877a-4dbb-8c0a-7d971b34bc75
OpenAI. ChatGPT. OpenAI, 2025, www.openai.com/chatgpt
Brittain, Blke. “Artist Sues after US Rejects Copyright for AI-Generated Image | Reuters.” Reuters, 2024, www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/artist-sues-after-us-rejects-copyright-ai-generated-image-2024-09-26/
Fleming, Lee, and Gianna G. Giudicati. “Recombination of Knowledge.” SpringerLink, Palgrave Macmillan UK, 1 Jan. 1970, link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1057/978-1-137-00772-8_368.
“Pros and Cons of Allowing AI Copyright.” Patexia, patexia.com/feed/pros-and-cons-of-allowing-ai-copyright-20230216. Accessed 19 Apr. 2025.
https://patexia.com/feed/pros-and-cons-of-allowing-ai-copyright-20230216
Here are the points made regarding this topic:
AI Copyright Defendant:
The generated artwork is an inspiration and therefore it cannot be copyrighted as long as it is referenced. For example, Henrik Ibsen’s play ‘‘A Doll’s House’’ is based on the life of Laura Smith Petersen and Ibsen has credited/referenced her in the printed and on-the-market version.
AI creates images from scratch. For example, if an image of an orange is generated based on a request, AI looks at many oranges and makes the best combination. Humans also rely on previous work and make their ‘‘own’’ version of it. Humans also look at thousands of oranges before it is able to draw an orange from scratch.
AI merely takes inspiration from previous artist work and does not directly copy; therefore, it cannot be subject to copyright.
Artist Copyright Defendant:
Allowing AI to own copyright would devalue artistic incentives.
Overall, The Scientific Debate Club argued that AI should own the copyright.
Resources
Hals, Tom, and Blake Brittain. “Humans vs. Machines: The Fight to Copyright AI Art.” Reuters, 1 Apr. 2023, www.reuters.com/default/humans-vs-machines-fight-copyright-ai-art-2023-04-01/
Brittain, Blake. “Artist Sues after US Rejects Copyright for AI-Generated Image.” Reuters, 26 Sept. 2024,www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/artist-sues-after-us-rejects-copyright-ai-generated-image-2024-09-26/.
Sookman, B. B. (2025, February 15). AI Copyright: Understanding recent reports and
implications. Lexology. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=27e675b6-877a-4dbb-8c0a-7d971b34bc75
OpenAI. ChatGPT. OpenAI, 2025, www.openai.com/chatgpt
Brittain, Blke. “Artist Sues after US Rejects Copyright for AI-Generated Image | Reuters.” Reuters, 2024, www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/artist-sues-after-us-rejects-copyright-ai-generated-image-2024-09-26/
Fleming, Lee, and Gianna G. Giudicati. “Recombination of Knowledge.” SpringerLink, Palgrave Macmillan UK, 1 Jan. 1970, link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1057/978-1-137-00772-8_368.
“Pros and Cons of Allowing AI Copyright.” Patexia, patexia.com/feed/pros-and-cons-of-allowing-ai-copyright-20230216. Accessed 19 Apr. 2025.
https://patexia.com/feed/pros-and-cons-of-allowing-ai-copyright-20230216