Can AI-Generated Art Be Copyrighted?

The rise of AI image generators has inspired excitement, confusion, and even fear in artistic communities. Artists have been experimenting with the technology’s creative capabilities to create artwork, but many are uncertain about whether such works can be copyrighted. In response, the U.S. Copyright Office issued guidance on this matter in January 2025. Here are the report’s key takeaways—and their implications for artists.

Copyright’s “Idea-Expression” Distinction

Under copyright law, ideas are not protected until you have expressed them, such as in a painting, book, movie, or song. Think of it as a two-step process:

• Idea - You want to paint a flower. ❌ No copyright protection

• Expression - You painted the flower. ✅Copyright protection

The “idea-expression” distinction is important for understanding the intersection between art and AI. If you have the idea to paint a flower, but you instruct an AI program to generate that image, you relinquish artistic control over how the idea is ultimately expressed. The AI will choose the type of flower, the colors, the angle at which the flower is presented, the weight of brushstrokes, the style of painting, and whether the flower is in a flowerpot, among many other creative decisions.

Copyright’s “Human-Non-Human” Distinction

In addition to the “idea-expression” distinction, copyright protection is granted only to humans. In the past, other “non-human” productions—such as selfies taken by a monkey, works authored by “spiritual beings,” and garden arrangements—have been denied copyright protection by the Copyright Office. The same rule applies to artwork created by AI programs.

When Can AI-Assisted Art Be Copyrightable?          

With the above two distinctions in mind, let’s discuss when art created or assisted by AI may be copyrightable. Essentially, it must involve sufficient human involvement.

Fully AI-Generated Art: Art solely generated by AI—with very limited or no human intervention—is NOT copyrightable.

The prompt’s author is not the author of the AI-generated output. The prompt is just a set of instructions that convey unprotected ideas, while the AI handles the creative expression. Even if the prompt is super detailed, AI still interprets it with some unpredictability and autonomy.

AI is not a “joint author” for copyright purposes. You cannot share authorship with AI, as AI is not a human author recognized by law.

Partially AI-Generated Art and Sufficiently Modified Art: Art partially generated by AI or sufficiently altered by human effort may be copyrightable. 

Only human‑authored portions of a mixed work are protected. The Copyright Office’s report gives an example of a film with AI-generated special effects. The film itself is copyrightable, while the special effects are not.

Substantially edited AI output may qualify for limited protection. If you modify AI-generated material in a manner that demonstrates significant human control, the work may be copyrightable. In April 2024, the Copyright Office granted partial copyright to author, Elisha Shupe—because she extensively edited nearly every AI‑generated sentence. Keep in mind that Shupe’s case was a rare one and that what legally constitutes “sufficient human control” is decided on a case-by-case basis by the Copyright Office.

Conclusion

There are certainly gray areas about the extent of authorship when a work contains human and AI-generated elements, but generally, the portions not created by human hands are unprotectable by copyright. So, if you’re an artist experimenting with the technology, always keep the above takeaways in mind and be careful; your work may not be protected unless you play a significant role in modifying what AI generates.  

Unsurprisingly, this guidance is subject to change. Artificial intelligence and the many laws surrounding it are constantly evolving. Regardless of your place in the art world, you must stay on top of any developments, so you would know your rights and adapt.