Reconciling Authorship and Artificial Intelligence: A Human Contribution Framework

Authors

  • Pranal Siripurapu University of Pittsburgh

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/pur.2026.150

Keywords:

Artificial Intelligence, Copyright, Authorship, Legal, Law

Abstract

As the applications of artificial intelligence continue to burgeon across every industry, it has created a crisis in copyright law. AI challenges the foundational assumption that authorship is distinctly a human title. While courts have historically adapted to new creative technologies, the recent rejection of copyright claims in Thaler v. Perlmutter and the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in Naruto v. Slater revealed a critical gap in the legal doctrine. Current U.S. law is unclear on what circumstances human and artificial intelligence collaboration satisfy the constitutional and statutory requirement of human-centered and originality. This paper argues that courts can and should recognize intellectual property rights for artificial intelligence assisted works that exhibit a spark of human creativity, without redefining authorship. It does this by taking account of historical precedence of seminal cases like Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony and Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., and by comparing international approaches taken by China, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. The paper proposes a statutory Human Contribution test that requires three key elements, demonstrable creative direction, intellectual shaping of product, and an authorial intent to create said work. By clarifying the boundaries of authorship in AI-assisted work, this paper introduces a framework that resolves a pressing legal dilemma and ensures copyright law continues to incentivize human innovation, prevent market distortions, and fulfill its constitutional purpose to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" in the age of artificial intelligence.

Author Biography

Pranal Siripurapu, University of Pittsburgh

Pranal Siripurapu is a freshman majoring in Computer Science at the University of Pittsburgh. He plans to pursue a career in the tech industry, with interests in technology and public policy.

References

Gaidartzi, Anthi and Irini Stamatoudi. “Authorship and Ownership Issues Raised by AI-Generated Works: A Comparative Analysis.” Laws 14, no. 4 (2025): 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14040057.

Authors Alliance. “The UK’s Curious Case of Copyright for AI-Generated Works: What Section 9(3) Means Today.” May 19, 2025. https://www.authorsalliance.org/2025/05/19/the-uks-curious-case-of-copyright-for-ai-generated-works-what-section-93-means-today/.

Bonfiglio. “Thaler v. Perlmutter.”

Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53 (1884).

“Burrow-Giles Lithographic Company v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53 (1884).” Justia Law. Accessed September 23, 2025. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/111/53/.

Computer Associates International, Inc. v. Altai, Inc., 982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992).

“Computer Associates International, Inc. v. Altai, Inc., 982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992).” Justia Law. Accessed September 23, 2025. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/982/693/137252/.

Copyright Act of 1909. https://www.copyright.gov/history/1909act.pdf.

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, c. 48 (UK). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents.

Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on Copyright and Related Rights in the Digital Single Market. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/790/oj/eng.

Federal Register. “2024 Guidance Update on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, Including on Artificial Intelligence.” July 17, 2024. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/07/17/2024-15377/2024-guidance-update-on-patent-subject-matter-eligibility-including-on-artificial-intelligence.

Federal Register. “Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence.” March 16, 2023. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/16/2023-05321/copyright-registration-guidance-works-containing-material-generated-by-artificial-intelligence.

Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991).

Flatfee. “Tencent Co., Ltd. v. Shanghai Yinxun Technology Co., Ltd 2018 Copyright Infringement Lawsuit.” Accessed September 23, 2025. https://flatfeecorp.com/articles/tencent-versus-shanghai-yinxun-technology-2018-copyright-infringement-case-china.

Goodwin. “DC Circuit Holds That AI Cannot Be an Author Under Copyright Law.” Accessed September 23, 2025. https://www.goodwinlaw.com/en/insights/publications/2025/03/alerts-technology-dc-circuit-holds-that-ai-cannot-be-an-author.

Hughes, Brandon E. “No Entrance to Legal Paradise: D.C. Court of Appeals Affirms Denial of Copyright Registration for AI-Generated Artwork.” Accessed September 23, 2025. https://www.msk.com/newsroom-alerts-3089.

Lemley, Mark A. How Generative AI Turns Copyright Upside Down.

Lucchi, Nicola. Generative AI and Copyright.

Militsyna, Kateryna. “On the Carrot and the Stick That Unfair Competition Law Can Offer to AI-Based Work-Like Output.” GRUR International 74, no. 9 (2025): 834–844. https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikaf098.

Naruto v. Slater, 888 F.3d 418 (9th Cir. 2018).

“Naruto v. Slater, No. 16-15469 (9th Cir. 2018).” Justia Law. Accessed September 23, 2025. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/16-15469/16-15469-2018-04-23.html.

Norton Rose Fulbright. “US Court of Appeals for DC Denies Copyright Registration for Work Generated Solely by AI Author.” Accessed September 23, 2025. https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publications/bfc31103/us-court-of-appeals-for-dc-denies-copyright-registration-for-work-generated-solely-by-ai-author.

Participation, Expert. “Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.” Statute Law Database. Accessed September 23, 2025. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents.

Perlmutter, Shira. Stephen Thaler, an Individual, Appellant.

The Computer Software Copyright Act of 1980. December 20, 2021. https://www.c2st.org/the-computer-software-copyright-act-of-1980/.

“Trademark Cases, 100 U.S. 82 (1879).” Justia Law. Accessed September 23, 2025. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/100/82/.

U.S. Constitution Annotated. “Article I, Section 8.” Library of Congress. Accessed September 23, 2025. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-1/section-8/.

Whelan Associates, Inc. v. Jaslow Dental Laboratory, Inc., 797 F.2d 1222 (3d Cir. 1986).

Downloads

Published

2026-03-27

How to Cite

Siripurapu, P. (2026). Reconciling Authorship and Artificial Intelligence: A Human Contribution Framework. Pittsburgh Undergraduate Review, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.5195/pur.2026.150

Issue

Vol. 5 No. 1 (2026): Pittsburgh Undergraduate Review

Section

Research

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Pranal Siripurapu

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
  9. The Author agrees to digitally sign the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work.