Governance and control

US Copyright Office requires human authorship for AI outputs

The Copyright Office concluded that generative-AI outputs receive copyright protection only where a human determines sufficient expressive elements, and that prompts alone do not establish authorship.

0 comments · 0 votesOpen discussion

Public discussion is readable by everyone. Sign in to comment, reply, or vote.

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

CURRENT ASSESSMENT · REVISION 1
AWAY FROM DOOM35confidence 98/100

Why it moved the index

The authoritative policy conclusion preserves a legal advantage for human creative control and limits ownership claims over autonomously generated expression. It interprets existing law rather than creating a new enforceable AI regime, so the magnitude is modest.

AUDIT TRAIL

Assessment history

  1. R1
    Away 35 · confidence 98

    New January 2025 national AI-authorship policy conclusion with no durable collision.

    12 Aug 2026
SHARE THE FINDINGS

Share this page

DoomBench social sharing card for US Copyright Office requires human authorship for AI outputs.
  1. DoomBench assesses “US Copyright Office requires human authorship for AI outputs” as evidence moving away from doom, with magnitude 35 and confidence 98 out of 100 in the governance and control category.

  2. The DoomBench assessment of “US Copyright Office requires human authorship for AI outputs” is based on reporting from US Copyright Office and records the editorial rationale, source quality, attribution, and revision history.

  3. DoomBench summarizes “US Copyright Office requires human authorship for AI outputs” as follows: The Copyright Office concluded that generative-AI outputs receive copyright protection only where a human determines sufficient expressive...

    https://www.doombench.com/news/us-copyright-office-requires-human-authorship-for-ai-outputs-2025-01-29