Can Artificial Intelligence Create? A Critical Examination of Originality, Authorship, and Copying in AI-Generated Works

Abstract

Artificial intelligence can now create music, art, and literature that closely resembles human work. This development creates serious problems for copyright law, which has always assumed that only humans can be authors. This paper examines whether AI can truly “create” in the legal sense and explores who should own the rights to AI-generated content. The study analyzes court decisions and legal guidelines from the United States, European Union, China, and India. The findings show that different countries take different approaches. American and European courts insist that copyright protection requires human authorship. The Thaler v. Perlmutter case in the US and the Cofemel case in Europe both rejected copyright for purely AI-generated works. Chinese courts, however, have shown more flexibility, granting protection when human input; such as creative prompts and careful selection; shapes the final output. The paper also addresses deeper questions. Could an AI system ever be considered a legal author? Current philosophical and scientific limitations make this unlikely, as we cannot determine whether machines possess consciousness or genuine creativity. The authors propose practical solutions, including a new type of legal protection specifically designed for AI-generated works, clear rules for disclosing AI involvement, and international cooperation to create consistent standards. Copyright law must adapt to technological change while preserving its core purpose: encouraging human creativity for public benefit.