Decisions · Policy · United States

The machine as author

Daniel J. Gervais (Vanderbilt Law School) · 2020 · Proposal · non-binding

105 Iowa Law Review 2053 (2020)

Protection of AI output

Can AI-generated work be protected?

Human authors only

Output without human creative choices belongs in the public domain

Why hereCoded at the pole: its core holding or recommendation answers the question outright.

What it says

Gervais weighs the arguments for protecting AI-made literary and artistic material and finds them unpersuasive. Output that does not reflect human creative choices should stay in the public domain; he offers a test for human and machine collaborations, applied to three scenarios.

A leading statement that copyright's line should be drawn at human creative choice.

Sources

This record

Data as of 2026-10-21.

Drafted with AI assistance and checked against the sources linked above; not yet reviewed by a lawyer. Methodology

No changes logged yet. The change log started on 2026-10-20.