Thaler v. Perlmutter: Human Authors at the Center of Copyright?
Abstract
Thaler v. Perlmutter affirms the central place of the human being in copyright’s doctrinal architecture. The D.C. Circuit proclaims that machines are mindless tools which do not need incentives nor possess subjectivity, downplays the importance of corporations in modern copyright law, and emphasizes the public benefit. The court makes equally clear that neither this decision nor the human authorship requirement will pose practical obstacles to the growing importance of AI-driven cultural production. In this way, the judgement continues the legacy of Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co. and Feist v. Rural, known for exalting authorial creativity while in fact lowering standards, focusing on economic growth, and in Bleistein’s case, hiding the work for hire behind personality language. I expect the upcoming Allen case to take this up even further – both affirming the human authorship requirement as a matter of formality and depriving it of any substantive weight.
Repository Citation
Blaszczyk, Mateusz, "Thaler v. Perlmutter: Human Authors at the Center of Copyright?" (2025). Popular Media. 335.
https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_pm/335
Published on Kluwer Copyright Blog (Apr. 8, 2025).