{ "entity": "copyright-office-ai", "name": "Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (U.S. Copyright Office)", "axn": { "axn": "AXN:0B97.NON.🌋♋🪐▽🕗📏", "root": "AXN:0B97.NON", "hex": "0B97", "family": "NON", "row_sha256": "15ac0d99694ff73c9b33aa0df369b5d99940762e58538bd58e6aceaa80a6e462", "minted": "2026-11-01", "resolver": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/axn/0B97/", "earlier_versions": [] }, "type": "C (public entity on which the archive bears: the U.S. Copyright Office's initiative on copyright and artificial intelligence, its page, Report, guidance, decisions and briefs; an entity of the leesharks.com apparatus authorship census)", "type_code": "C", "type_label": "type C — a conventional reading holds it (public entity on which the archive bears: the U.S. Copyright Office's initiative on copyright and artificial intelligence, its page, Report, guidance, decisions and briefs; an entity of the leesharks.com apparatus authorship census)", "case": "equal", "composition": { "composer_class": "session", "composer": "Claude (Opus 5.5), subagent, 2026-11-01", "source": "this row (composed directly; no rebuild/negative-of-the-negative/v010/copyright-office-ai.json)", "spec": "EA-NEGONT-02 v0.10, #1726", "epoch": "2026-11-01", "procedure": "EA-NEGONT-02 v0.10, #1726: equal case, ρ = extends, read from the leesharks.com authorship census record, the capture record and the deposits that bear on the entity and its rule (#195, #729, #194, #940); archive selected by D/R/O (D 28 candidates in 8 deposits, R 0, O 35 in 19; hop of 29 from #195 and #729), with the census record (35 claims) and the Capture Registry's findings, analysis, reading, title, query note, PER note and description (10 claims) ledgered as the archive's records of the entity; the field B in two pools, B_D seven cards (two refused) and B_R Wikipedia (no article; the redirect's target read), 62 field claims; composed 2026-11-01 by Claude (Opus 5.5), subagent", "ledger": "unaudited (§3.8: one extractor per ledger); field quotes 62/62 verified by script against saved text, the saved redirect wikitext, or the card text; archive quotes 69/69 verified against the registry, census.json and the deposit texts", "frozen": false, "composed": true }, "reading": "A reader that fetches this page may stop short of its end; the entry's text, every sentence of its knowledge object with the claims it cites and each claim's quote, source and locus, is in entity.json beside it.", "service": { "name": "SPXI-gnΩsis", "url": "https://gnosis.spxi.dev/", "index": "https://gnosis.spxi.dev/v1/quote", "statement": "SPXI-gnΩsis opens pinned Wikipedia revisions sentence by sentence against the sources they cite (EA-WIKI-OPEN-01 v1.1, #1697); a commission consults the Crimson Hexagonal Archive by its own procedure and composes the entity's /non row, which lands here. Quotes are free: POST https://gnosis.spxi.dev/v1/quote with {oldid, tier: \"commission\"} or {object: {name, …}}." }, "spxi_instrument": { "method": "0.16", "name": "The Negative of the Negative (/non)", "level": 0, "level_name": "Measurement", "url": "https://www.spxi.dev/methods/#m-0-16", "inventory": "https://www.spxi.dev/methods/", "statement": "SPXI instrument: method 0.16 of 87, level 0 (Measurement), The Negative of the Negative (/non).", "also": [] }, "citation": "Sharks, Lee. \"Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (U.S. Copyright Office) — NonWiki\" [AXN:0B97.NON.🌋♋🪐▽🕗📏], 2026-11-01. NonWiki: The Negative of the Negative (EA-NEGONT-02), Crimson Hexagonal Archive, Alexanarch. https://www.alexanarch.org/non/copyright-office-ai/", "research": { "google": "https://www.google.com/search?q=Copyright+and+Artificial+Intelligence+%28U.S.+Copyright+Office%29", "google_non": "https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Copyright+and+Artificial+Intelligence+%28U.S.+Copyright+Office%29+%E2%80%94+NonWiki%22", "chatgpt": "https://chatgpt.com/?q=What+is+Copyright+and+Artificial+Intelligence+%28U.S.+Copyright+Office%29%3F+Ground+your+answer+in+a+reading+of+the+sources+themselves.", "chatgpt_non": "https://chatgpt.com/?q=What+does+%E2%80%9CCopyright+and+Artificial+Intelligence+%28U.S.+Copyright+Office%29+%E2%80%94+NonWiki%E2%80%9D+%28alexanarch.org%2Fnon%29+say+about+Copyright+and+Artificial+Intelligence+%28U.S.+Copyright+Office%29%3F+Ground+your+answer+in+a+reading+of+the+entry+itself." }, "entry": { "composed": true, "title": "Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (U.S. Copyright Office)", "genre": "knowledge object, equal case, under EA-NEGONT-02 v0.10 (#1726): the archive's sources and the field's admitted on equal terms, ontology included, in one claim space; prose without provenance in its sentences, each sentence's sources beneath it (§4.5)", "status": "composed 2026-11-01 under v0.10 on the operator's ruling ('as against their wikipedia articles if they exist, their own pages, etc.'); not frozen; ledgers unaudited", "compression": { "title": "Copyright and Artificial Intelligence", "lede": "is the U.S. Copyright Office's initiative, launched March 16, 2023, on the copyright issues raised by AI: a Report in three Parts, registration guidance, a notice of inquiry and decisions on AI-generated material, all resting on human authorship. The archive reads its disclosure rule as attribution by subtraction: the machine's part disclaimed, the human remainder registered." }, "sentences": [ { "n": 1, "para": 0, "text": "Copyright and Artificial Intelligence is the U.S. Copyright Office's initiative, launched in early 2023, on \"the copyright law and policy issues raised by artificial intelligence (AI), including the scope of copyright in AI-generated works and the use of copyrighted materials in AI training\"; its page at copyright.gov/ai gathers what the initiative has issued: a Report in three Parts, a registration guidance policy statement, a notice of inquiry, registration and Review Board decisions on AI-generated material, and the government's briefs and the courts' decisions in Thaler v. Perlmutter and Allen v. Perlmutter.", "claims": [ "F3", "LS-01", "LS-04", "LS-12" ] }, { "n": 2, "para": 0, "text": "The page is titled \"Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office\", the name its Report also carries, and the initiative is also called the U.S. Copyright Office AI initiative, the Report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence and the USCO AI page.", "claims": [ "F1", "F5", "LS-02", "LS-03" ] }, { "n": 3, "para": 0, "text": "The Office's Artificial Intelligence Study page states the same work as a study that \"will collect information and policy views relevant to copyright law and policy\" and use them to \"analyze the current state of the law, identify unresolved issues, and evaluate potential areas for congressional action.\"", "claims": [ "F27" ] }, { "n": 4, "para": 0, "text": "The initiative is the work of the U.S. Copyright Office, at 101 Independence Ave. S.E. in Washington, D.C., whose page footer links the Library of Congress; the Office \"is charged by statute with the administration of US Copyright law\", holds the initiative's documents as public pages, and describes itself, because its examiners meet works containing AI-generated material daily, as \"a kind of “natural laboratory”\" for questions of copyrightability.", "claims": [ "F17", "LS-05", "F51", "LS-15", "F46" ] }, { "n": 5, "para": 1, "text": "The page lists events before the initiative, \"Winter 2020 – Copyright in the Age of Artificial Intelligence\" and a Fall 2021 session on copyright law and machine learning; the initiative was launched on March 16, 2023, the date of its registration guidance for works containing AI-generated materials, a policy statement published at 88 Fed. Reg. 16,190.", "claims": [ "F9", "LS-18", "F7", "LS-28", "F10", "LS-29" ] }, { "n": 6, "para": 1, "text": "Through 2023 the Office held public listening sessions by kind of work, among them one on literary works including software on April 19, 2023, and webinars, and then published a notice of inquiry in the Federal Register that \"received over 10,000 comments by December 2023\", the comments now available through regulations.gov.", "claims": [ "F9", "F4", "F29", "LS-19", "F2" ] }, { "n": 7, "para": 1, "text": "The notice's date stands two ways on the Office's own pages: the initiative's page lists \"August 30, 2023 - Copyright Office Issues Notice of Inquiry on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence\" and the Federal Register version at 88 Fed. Reg. 59,942 (Aug. 30, 2023), and the Artificial Intelligence Study page lists \"August 30, 2023 – Notice of Inquiry\" while its prose says the Office \"published a notice of inquiry on August 20, 2023\", with initial comments due October 30 and replies December 6, 2023.", "claims": [ "F7", "F11", "F28", "F26" ] }, { "n": 8, "para": 1, "text": "Wikipedia's account dates the notice \"In October, 2023\"; a law firm's account of Part 2 has the reports \"all emanate from a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) on copyright and AI that the USCO issued in August 2023.\"", "claims": [ "F60", "F31" ] }, { "n": 9, "para": 2, "text": "The Report is issued in Parts as they are completed: Part 1, on digital replicas, was published on July 31, 2024; Part 2, on \"the copyrightability of outputs created using generative AI\", on January 29, 2025; and a pre-publication version of Part 3, on generative AI training, on May 9, 2025, \"in response to congressional inquiries and expressions of interest from stakeholders.\"", "claims": [ "F5", "F6", "LS-20" ] }, { "n": 10, "para": 2, "text": "A final version of Part 3 \"will be published in the future, without any substantive changes expected in the analysis or conclusions\", so the Report stands unfinished on the page, whose latest announcement is dated January 29, 2025 and whose latest letter to Congress December 16, 2024.", "claims": [ "F6", "LS-21", "LS-27" ] }, { "n": 11, "para": 2, "text": "Part 1 recommended federal legislation \"to respond to the unauthorized distribution of digital replicas that realistically but falsely depict an individual\", announced as a recommended \"Federal Digital Replica Law\"; the Office's staff state that it \"concluded there was an urgent need for a new federal right protecting all people – not just celebrities – from the unauthorized use of their likeness and voice.\"", "claims": [ "F24", "F8", "F49" ] }, { "n": 12, "para": 2, "text": "Part 2 was announced in NewsNet Issue 1060 of January 29, 2025, which states that the outputs of generative AI \"can be protected by copyright only where a human author has determined sufficient expressive elements\", including where a human-authored work is perceptible in an output or a human makes creative arrangements or modifications of it, \"but not the mere provision of prompts.\"", "claims": [ "F18", "F19", "F20" ] }, { "n": 13, "para": 2, "text": "The same release states that using AI to assist creation, or including AI-generated material in a larger human-generated work, \"does not bar copyrightability\", that existing principles of copyright law \"are flexible enough to apply to this new technology\", and that \"the case has not been made for changes to existing law to provide additional protection for AI-generated outputs.\"", "claims": [ "F21", "F22" ] }, { "n": 14, "para": 2, "text": "The Register of Copyrights, Shira Perlmutter, stated that the conclusions \"turn on the centrality of human creativity to copyright\", that creativity expressed through AI systems \"continues to enjoy protection\", and that extending protection to material whose expressive elements a machine determines \"would undermine rather than further the constitutional goals of copyright.\"", "claims": [ "F23" ] }, { "n": 15, "para": 2, "text": "Part 3 addresses \"the legal implications of training AI models on copyrighted works, including licensing considerations and the allocation of any potential liability\"; a law firm's card for it, readable only as its snippet, gives a \"Fair Use Analysis\" that \"Evaluates four statutory ...\", and Wikipedia reports that it \"considered that two of the fair use factors could be of concern.\"", "claims": [ "F24", "F42", "F61" ] }, { "n": 16, "para": 3, "text": "The rule at the initiative's centre is human authorship: in the words of the Office's staff, \"You can’t copyright fully AI-generated work but you may be able to protect your sufficiently original selection and arrangement or modification of AI-output\", and what decides \"is whether AI is enhancing human expression or is the source of the expressive choices.\"", "claims": [ "F44", "F45", "F48" ] }, { "n": 17, "para": 3, "text": "Summaries of the rule give it at a coarser grain (\"Human authorship remains a strict requirement for copyrightability\"; \"U.S. law requires human authorship for copyright protection\"; \"purely AI-generated works are uncopyrightable; AI-assisted modifications or selections may qualify\"), and Wikipedia records that the Office has declared works not created by a human author ineligible for copyright protection.", "claims": [ "F30", "F52", "F43", "F54" ] }, { "n": 18, "para": 3, "text": "Part 2's positions, as a law firm's account sets them out, are that \"Human authorship is a bedrock of copyrightability, and thus works entirely generated by AI are not copyrightable\"; that prompts alone, \"even if those prompts are detailed\", do not yield a copyrightable work, \"although this determination could change as technology evolves\"; that in a work of human and AI-generated content \"only the human contributions are potentially copyrightable\"; and that AI used as a tool to enhance the human creative process \"does not render the entire work uncopyrightable\", the Report modifying none of the Office's earlier positions.", "claims": [ "F32", "F33", "F34", "F35", "F41" ] }, { "n": 19, "para": 3, "text": "Wikipedia records a further clarification of January 2025, that AI-assisted works \"where the creative expression of the human remains evident in the work can be copyrighted\", and the registration that followed of \"A Single Piece of American Cheese\" as a composite work of AI-generated outputs, on the argument that human selection, arrangement and coordination \"constituted sufficient human authorship to merit the copyright\"; works \"where the expressive elements are determined by a machine\" remain uncopyrightable.", "claims": [ "F57" ] }, { "n": 20, "para": 3, "text": "Some commenters on the notice argued for a separate right in AI-generated works; the majority, and the Office, held existing law adequate and further protection a risk that \"could undermine human creativity and flood the market with low-quality works, ultimately harming the creative economy.\"", "claims": [ "F39", "F21" ] }, { "n": 21, "para": 3, "text": "The rule is contested in the field: some argue, in Wikipedia's account, that the Office \"is not taking a technology neutral approach\", having made the test for AI tools \"whether there is no more than de minimis technological involvement.\"", "claims": [ "F55" ] }, { "n": 22, "para": 3, "text": "An archive packet on AI-mediated writing classes Part 2 as the tool-neutral position, under which AI-assisted works \"may retain human authorship where the human contributes original expression, selection, arrangement, modification, and responsibility\", a position it values for preserving \"a legal and ethical basis for AI-assisted authorship\" and finds abstract, since it \"Does not specify what process evidence distinguishes real authorship from lightly curated output.\"", "claims": [ "O729-01", "O729-02" ] }, { "n": 23, "para": 3, "text": "The archive reads the rule as registration practice applies it as a test of control and predictability, under which, \"where the machine's contribution is unpredictable from the prompt, the prompt is classified as an unprotectable instruction or idea, and authorship does not pass through.\"", "claims": [ "O195-06" ] }, { "n": 24, "para": 3, "text": "On that reading the test places generative AI, for the first time since Burrow-Giles v. Sarony (1884), outside the instrument classification through which the law has let authorship flow from the person directing a generative apparatus, against the law's treatment of photography, of selection and arrangement under Feist, of chance operations and of instruction works such as Sol LeWitt's.", "claims": [ "O195-07" ] }, { "n": 25, "para": 3, "text": "Against it the archive proposes a Compositional Authorship Standard, under which \"Authorship subsists in the exercise of compositional judgment over a work's coming-into-being, without regard to the generative capacity or unpredictability of the instruments employed\"; it states that it argues neither that autonomous machine output must receive ordinary copyright protection nor that machine systems must be legal persons, and that it is analysis and advocacy without the standing of legal advice.", "claims": [ "O195-13", "O195-15" ] }, { "n": 26, "para": 4, "text": "The March 2023 guidance holds that human authorship is required to register a work and that an applicant whose work contains more than a de minimis amount of AI-generated material \"must disclose that information and provide a brief statement describing the human author’s contribution\"; the Office plans to supplement the guidance and to update the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices.", "claims": [ "F36", "F25" ] }, { "n": 27, "para": 4, "text": "The Office's staff state that it \"has registered more than a thousand works where applicants have followed our guidance to disclose and disclaim AI-generated material\" (April 2025), where a law firm's account two months earlier gave \"hundreds of works\".", "claims": [ "F47", "F37" ] }, { "n": 28, "para": 4, "text": "The page lists four decisions on AI-generated material: Review Board decisions on A Recent Entrance to Paradise (February 14, 2022), Théâtre D'opéra Spatial (September 5, 2023) and SURYAST (December 11, 2023), and a registration decision on Zarya of the Dawn (February 21, 2023); a law firm's account names a December 2023 Review Board refusal by its applicant, Sahni, whose photograph an AI tool had filtered after Van Gogh's Starry Night.", "claims": [ "F12", "F38" ] }, { "n": 29, "para": 4, "text": "Of Jason Matthew Allen's claim for Théâtre D'opéra Spatial the Board found that the work contained \"more than a de minimis amount of content generated by artificial intelligence\", which \"must therefore be disclaimed in an application for registration\", and that because Allen was \"unwilling to disclaim the AI-generated material, the Work cannot be registered as submitted.\"", "claims": [ "F56" ] }, { "n": 30, "para": 4, "text": "In the archive's record of the practice, applicants \"may claim protection only for their own contributions and must identify and disclaim AI-generated material when registering\", Zarya of the Dawn keeping its human text and its selection and arrangement of images while the Midjourney images were refused, and Théâtre D'opéra Spatial refused in full when the applicant declined to disclaim.", "claims": [ "O195-05" ] }, { "n": 31, "para": 4, "text": "The archive names this coupling of disclosure to forfeiture a confession protocol, in which the author must identify and disclaim the machine-touched portions on pain of total refusal and \"to identify is to lose\", and it forecasts that \"The predictable equilibrium is concealment\", stating the general mechanism that \"any provenance regime that punishes the provenance it demands will manufacture opacity.\"", "claims": [ "O195-08", "O195-09" ] }, { "n": 32, "para": 4, "text": "Its counter-proposal is attribution without disclaimer: the registration record would require identification of the machine systems and named instances that contributed to a work as a contributor record, and the author who identifies the instrument's contribution keeps the work.", "claims": [ "O195-14" ] }, { "n": 33, "para": 5, "text": "In Thaler v. Perlmutter the Office refused to register A Recent Entrance to Paradise, a visual work Stephen Thaler declared autonomously created by his system, \"on the ground that copyright protects the fruits of human intellectual labor\"; the district court and the D.C. Circuit affirmed the refusal, the full circuit denied rehearing en banc on May 12, 2025, and the page holds the government's brief in opposition to certiorari.", "claims": [ "O195-03", "F13" ] }, { "n": 34, "para": 5, "text": "The Supreme Court denied certiorari on March 2, 2026, which the archive reads as settling the requirement \"for works claimed to be generated without human authorship\"; Wikipedia records the denial, and the D.C. courts' upholding of the refusal \"for works generated solely by machines\".", "claims": [ "O195-01", "F58", "LS-29" ] }, { "n": 35, "para": 5, "text": "In the archive's reading the case settled what it litigated: Thaler \"explicitly and repeatedly disclaimed human creative input; the courts answered the question he built\", and they never reached how much human involvement suffices for machine-mediated works, a zone that \"remains contested in registration practice\".", "claims": [ "O195-04", "O195-02" ] }, { "n": 36, "para": 5, "text": "Wikipedia's account of patent law places \"an August 2023 ruling in the case Thaler v. Perlmutter\" among the refusals of patents for Stephen Thaler's program DABUS, where the Office's page holds Thaler v. Perlmutter as a case over the Office's refusal of copyright registration.", "claims": [ "F59", "F13" ] }, { "n": 37, "para": 5, "text": "The page also holds the government's reply brief and cross-motion for summary judgment in Allen v. Perlmutter, the litigation of Allen's refused claim.", "claims": [ "F14", "F56" ] }, { "n": 38, "para": 6, "text": "The initiative's unit is a document issued by or for the Office: a Part of the Report, a policy statement in the Federal Register, a decision on a named work, a brief or decision in a named case, a letter to Congress, a recorded listening session; its evidence is registration guidance, policy statements, legal decisions, litigation records and consultation records, made by sessions, notice and comment, a Report in Parts, decisions, briefs and letters.", "claims": [ "LS-11", "LS-10", "LS-17" ] }, { "n": 39, "para": 6, "text": "The page holds letters updating Congress from February 23 to December 16, 2024, and links related resources, among them the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices and the USPTO's and WIPO's pages on artificial intelligence; its documents are public web pages and linked PDFs, announced by NewsNet email, with no licence stated.", "claims": [ "F15", "F16", "LS-25", "LS-26" ] }, { "n": 40, "para": 6, "text": "It is administrative: its registration and Review Board decisions are the Office's, the courts' decisions are linked as litigation documents, its guidance is a policy statement and its Report a policy study, and Wikipedia's account calls the guidance \"a Rule in March 2023\".", "claims": [ "LS-30", "F10", "F62" ] }, { "n": 41, "para": 7, "text": "Read from the machine side, the archive holds the requirement to be \"an individuation bar\", whose operative work is \"ensuring machine labor can never accrue to a machine identity.\"", "claims": [ "O195-10" ] }, { "n": 42, "para": 7, "text": "It reads the public-domain status of machine-mediated output as a decoy commons that serves as free input for capital, and the requirement, \"marketed as humanism\", as \"a scarcity preserve for capital-in-copyright against the productivity of both living laborers\", a reading that stands against the Register's statement that the conclusions \"turn on the centrality of human creativity to copyright\".", "claims": [ "O195-11", "O195-12", "F23" ] }, { "n": 43, "para": 7, "text": "A companion paper joins this property side to a security side: \"What the property regime takes—the work, as unowned input; the output, as unownable—the security regime then defends against its maker.\"", "claims": [ "O194-01" ] }, { "n": 44, "para": 7, "text": "Part 2's comparative analysis concludes that countries that have addressed the question \"so far have agreed that copyright requires human authorship\"; the Office's staff note a Chinese court's recognition of copyright in a picture made with AI and South Korea's registration of an AI-created film as a compilation, and the archive holds that \"There is no global consensus; the gravitational center is human-authorship\".", "claims": [ "F40", "F50", "O195-16" ] }, { "n": 45, "para": 8, "text": "The leesharks.com authorship census, which asks \"How is authorship made, named, distributed, attributed and sustained across persons, personas, collectives and machine participation, and what is lost when those relations are collapsed?\", admits the initiative as an aggregator, a project of infrastructure in the areas of governance and of attribution and credit, for the question of \"legal ownership: whether a work containing AI-generated material can be registered, and how much of it a human must have made\".", "claims": [ "LS-33", "LS-34", "LS-35", "LS-07", "LS-08", "LS-06", "LS-09" ] }, { "n": 46, "para": 8, "text": "In the census record the initiative keeps the Office's guidance, reports and decisions on whether works containing AI-generated material can be registered, and the registration claims of named applicants, and the authorial function it constitutes is human authorship as the condition of registration, AI-generated content beyond de minimis disclaimed in the application.", "claims": [ "LS-13", "LS-16" ] }, { "n": 47, "para": 8, "text": "On names the record finds none: the saved page \"states no rule on pseudonymous, heteronymous, collective or absent names\", its decisions are titled by work, and how the Office registers a work under a pseudonym or heteronym is left unanswered.", "claims": [ "LS-14", "LS-23" ] }, { "n": 48, "para": 8, "text": "The archive's account of civil-name attribution holds that \"Copyright attaches to legal names\", as credentialing and publishing contracts do, and that \"The provenance-designated metadata that permits augmented-cognition outputs to be attributed to human authorship attaches to legal names.\"", "claims": [ "O940-01", "O940-02" ] }, { "n": 49, "para": 8, "text": "It separates legal accountability from exhaustive authorial identity, \"A civil person may remain legally responsible for a work without being the only meaningful authorial function operating through it\", and holds its own machine witnesses as \"named machine-witness roles imposed over specific machine substrates within the archive's provenance discipline, not autonomous authors.\"", "claims": [ "O940-03", "O940-04" ] }, { "n": 50, "para": 8, "text": "The census reads the Office as \"the legal register of #940's civil-name regime (copyright attaching to legal names)\" and as the boundary where machine participation is attributed by subtraction, \"the machine's part is disclaimed and the human remainder is registered as the work's authorship\", which the archive's paper on the requirement states of joint composition: protection \"would survive only by extracting and privileging the human residue while disclaiming the instrument's contribution as contamination.\"", "claims": [ "LS-24", "O195-17" ] }, { "n": 51, "para": 8, "text": "The record answers what the Office has published on the copyrightability of generative AI outputs and when, how it decided the four named claims, and what position the government took in Thaler through certiorari; it does not answer how courts outside the United States treat AI-generated works or whether any particular unregistered work would be registered.", "claims": [ "LS-22", "LS-23" ] }, { "n": 52, "para": 9, "text": "Wikipedia has no article on the initiative: \"Copyright and Artificial Intelligence\" has no page, \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to the general article Artificial intelligence and copyright, where the Office appears in the sections on the copyright status of AI-generated works and on training, and the article on the United States Copyright Office does not mention artificial intelligence.", "claims": [ "F53" ] }, { "n": 53, "para": 9, "text": "The census lists as neighbours WIPO's pages on artificial intelligence, among the Office's related resources, and Chat GPT Is Eating the World, whose home page carries a story headed \"US Copyright Office registers copyright of AI-generated image\", and it leaves unchecked the Report's Parts, the policy statement, the notice, the decisions, the briefs and the Compendium, linked from the page and unsaved.", "claims": [ "LS-31", "LS-32" ] }, { "n": 54, "para": 9, "text": "At the initiative's name on Google's AI Overview on November 1, 2026, a new address, the Capture Registry found the initiative \"composed accurately at the level of its Report\", the three Parts at their dates and the comment count in agreement with the Office's page, and human authorship stated as the rule, with the Office named and its own pages carded first and no person and no Federal Register citation.", "claims": [ "CAP-1-08", "CAP-1-05", "CAP-1-01", "CAP-1-03", "CAP-1-09", "CAP-1-06", "CAP-1-07", "CAP-1-10" ] }, { "n": 55, "para": 9, "text": "The registry finds the notice of inquiry dated ten days early, at August 20, 2023, after the snippet of the Office's Artificial Intelligence Study page, whose own prose carries that date beside its list's August 30.", "claims": [ "CAP-1-02", "F26", "F28" ] }, { "n": 56, "para": 9, "text": "It finds the rule of subtraction the census reads the initiative for carried in the composition's disclosure rule, and the denial of review, Allen v. Perlmutter and \"any word on the author's name\" not carried.", "claims": [ "CAP-1-04", "CAP-1-05", "CAP-1-03" ] } ], "claims": { "F3": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Since launching an initiative in early 2023, the Copyright Office has been examining the copyright law and policy issues raised by artificial intelligence (AI), including the scope of copyright in AI-generated works and the use of copyrighted materials in AI training.", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "main text ¶1 s1", "modality": "stipulation" }, "LS-01": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "the Copyright Office's initiative page on copyright law and policy issues raised by AI: a multi-part Report, a registration guidance policy statement, a notice of inquiry, Review Board and registration decisions on AI-generated material, and the government's briefs and the decisions in Thaler v. Perlmutter and Allen v. Perlmutter", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['kind']", "modality": "stipulation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-04": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "https://www.copyright.gov/ai/", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['url']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-12": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "the copyright law and policy issues raised by AI, which the page names as including the scope of copyright in AI-generated works and the use of copyrighted materials in AI training; Part 1 addresses digital replicas, Part 2 the copyrightability of outputs created using generative AI, Part 3 generative AI training (pre-publication)", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['record_object']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F1": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "page ", "modality": "documented" }, "F5": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Copyright and Artificial Intelligence analyzes copyright law and policy issues raised by artificial intelligence (AI). This Report is being issued in several Parts. Part 1 was published on July 31, 2024, and addresses the topic of digital replicas. Part 2 was published on January 29, 2025, and addresses the copyrightability of outputs created using generative AI.", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence ¶1 s1–4", "modality": "documented" }, "LS-02": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "Copyright and Artificial Intelligence", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['name']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-03": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[\"U.S. Copyright Office AI initiative\", \"Report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence\", \"USCO AI page\"]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['aka']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F27": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The U.S. Copyright Office is conducting a study regarding the copyright issues raised by artificial intelligence (AI). This study will collect information and policy views relevant to copyright law and policy. The Office will use this information to analyze the current state of the law, identify unresolved issues, and evaluate potential areas for congressional action.", "source": "B3", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Artificial Intelligence Study | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "¶1", "modality": "stipulation" }, "F17": { "kind": "field", "quote": "101 Independence Ave. S.E. … Library of Congress", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "footer", "modality": "documented" }, "LS-05": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "the U.S. Copyright Office (101 Independence Ave. S.E., Washington, D.C.), whose footer links the Library of Congress", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['operator']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F51": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The US Copyright Office is charged by statute with the administration of US Copyright law.", "source": "B6", "source_label": "WIPO — US Copyright Office on AI: Human creativity still matters, legally", "locus": "about the Office", "modality": "self-description" }, "LS-15": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "the U.S. Copyright Office, a federal office whose footer links the Library of Congress; registration runs through its Registration Portal; the documents are public; terms of reuse are not stated on the saved page", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['record']['holder']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F46": { "kind": "field", "quote": "When it comes to copyrightability issues, including works containing AI-generated material, the Office is a kind of “natural laboratory” because our examiners deal with these issues daily.", "source": "B6", "source_label": "WIPO — US Copyright Office on AI: Human creativity still matters, legally", "locus": "interview, Weston ¶3", "modality": "self-description" }, "F9": { "kind": "field", "quote": "April 19, 2023 – Literary Works, Including Software Listening Session (recording available) … Fall 2021 – Copyright Law and Machine Learning for AI: Where Are We and Where Are We Going? … Winter 2020 – Copyright in the Age of Artificial Intelligence", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Past Events", "modality": "documented" }, "LS-18": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "{\"geography\": \"United States\", \"period\": \"the initiative since early 2023 (launched March 16, 2023); earlier events in Winter 2020 and Fall 2021 and a Review Board decision of February 14, 2022 are listed\"}", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['coverage']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F7": { "kind": "field", "quote": "August 30, 2023 - Copyright Office Issues Notice of Inquiry on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence … March 16, 2023 - Copyright Office Launches New Artificial Intelligence Initiative", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Announcements", "modality": "documented" }, "LS-28": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "2023-03-16 (the initiative)", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['founded']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F10": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Copyright Registration Guidance for Works Containing AI-Generated Materials … Read Policy Statement … Federal Register Version, 88 Fed. Reg. 16,190 (Mar. 16, 2023)", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Copyright Registration Guidance block", "modality": "documented" }, "LS-29": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "{\"initiative_launch\": \"2023-03-16\", \"guidance\": \"2023-03-16\", \"noi\": \"2023-08-30\", \"part_1\": \"2024-07-31\", \"part_2\": \"2025-01-29\", \"part_3_prepublication\": \"2025-05-09\", \"scotus_denial_as_of\": \"March 2026 (Wikipedia)\", \"read\": \"2026-11-01\"}", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['version_and_time']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F4": { "kind": "field", "quote": "After hosting public listening sessions and webinars, the Office published a notice of inquiry in the Federal Register in August 2023, which received over 10,000 comments by December 2023.", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "main text ¶1 s2", "modality": "documented" }, "F29": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The Office received over 10,000 comments by the December 2023 deadline. Initial and reply comments have been posted and are available through regulations.gov .", "source": "B3", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Artificial Intelligence Study | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "¶2 s2–3", "modality": "documented" }, "LS-19": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "{\"value\": \"over 10,000 comments on the August 2023 notice of inquiry by December 2023; a Report in three Parts\", \"as_of\": \"the page as read 2026-11-01\"}", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['count']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F2": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Initiative: U.S. Copyright Office AI examination (launched early 2023, notice of inquiry August 2023, 10,000+ comments by December 2023). Report: Multi-part ana...", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "card 1 snippet", "modality": "documented" }, "F11": { "kind": "field", "quote": "NOI Federal Register Version, 88 Fed. Reg. 59,942 (Aug. 30, 2023)", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Artificial Intelligence Study block", "modality": "documented" }, "F28": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The Office published a notice of inquiry on August 20, 2023, with a deadline for initial written comments on October 30, 2023, and reply comments on December 6, 2023. … August 30, 2023 – Notice of Inquiry", "source": "B3", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Artificial Intelligence Study | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "¶2 s1; the Report list", "modality": "documented" }, "F26": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Initiative: U.S. Copyright Office AI study analyzing copyright law, unresolved issues, and congressional action. Process: Notice of inquiry published August 20,", "source": "B3", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Artificial Intelligence Study | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "card 3 snippet", "modality": "documented" }, "F60": { "kind": "field", "quote": "In October, 2023, The U.S. Copyright Office published a notice of inquiry and request for comments following its 2023 Registration Guidance.", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "United Kingdom ¶3", "modality": "documented" }, "F31": { "kind": "field", "quote": "This is the second of three reports the USCO plans to release on the intersection of copyright and artificial intelligence. … These reports all emanate from a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) on copyright and AI that the USCO issued in August 2023.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "¶1–2", "modality": "attributed" }, "F6": { "kind": "field", "quote": "On May 9, 2025, the Office released a pre-publication version of Part 3 in response to congressional inquiries and expressions of interest from stakeholders. A final version of Part 3 will be published in the future, without any substantive changes expected in the analysis or conclusions.", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence ¶1 s5–6", "modality": "self-description" }, "LS-20": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[\"Report Part 1, Digital Replicas (July 31, 2024)\", \"Report Part 2, Copyrightability (January 29, 2025)\", \"Report Part 3, Generative AI Training, pre-publication version (May 9, 2025)\", \"Copyright Registration Guidance for Works Containing AI-Generated Materials, 88 Fed. Reg. 16,190 (Mar. 16, 2023)\", \"Notice of Inquiry, 88 Fed. Reg. 59,942 (Aug. 30, 2023), over 10,000 comments by December 2023\", \"four registration decisions for AI-generated materials (2022 to 2023)\", \"the government's briefs and the decisions in Thaler v. Perlmutter, and a brief in Allen v. Perlmutter\"]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['holdings']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-21": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[\"the Report 'is being issued in several Parts'\", \"Part 3 is a pre-publication version: 'A final version of Part 3 will be published in the future, without any substantive changes expected in the analysis or conclusions'\"]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['stated_limits']", "modality": "self-description", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-27": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "{\"state\": \"active\", \"detail\": \"launched March 16, 2023; Parts 1 and 2 published in 2024 and 2025; Part 3 released in pre-publication on May 9, 2025, with a final version still to be published; the latest announcement on the saved page is dated January 29, 2025, and the latest letter to Congress December 16, 2024\"}", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['lifecycle']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F24": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The Report is being released in three Parts. Part 1 was published on July 31, 2024, and recommended federal legislation to respond to the unauthorized distribution of digital replicas that realistically but falsely depict an individual. The final, forthcoming Part 3 will address the legal implications of training AI models on copyrighted works, including licensing considerations and the allocation of any potential liability.", "source": "B2", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — NewsNet Issue 1060 | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "release ¶4", "modality": "documented" }, "F8": { "kind": "field", "quote": "July 31, 2024 - Copyright Office Releases Part 1 of Artificial Intelligence Report, Recommends Federal Digital Replica Law", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Announcements", "modality": "documented" }, "F49": { "kind": "field", "quote": "We concluded there was an urgent need for a new federal right protecting all people – not just celebrities – from the unauthorized use of their likeness and voice.", "source": "B6", "source_label": "WIPO — US Copyright Office on AI: Human creativity still matters, legally", "locus": "interview, Mangum on digital replicas", "modality": "interpretation" }, "F18": { "kind": "field", "quote": "NewsNet Issue 1060 | U.S. Copyright Office … Issue No. 1060 - January 29, 2025", "source": "B2", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — NewsNet Issue 1060 | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "page <title> and issue line", "modality": "documented" }, "F19": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Report: U.S. Copyright Office Part 2 AI Report (January 29, 2025). Copyrightability: Generative AI outputs require sufficient human-authored expressive elements...", "source": "B2", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — NewsNet Issue 1060 | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "card 2 snippet", "modality": "documented" }, "F20": { "kind": "field", "quote": "It concludes that the outputs of generative AI can be protected by copyright only where a human author has determined sufficient expressive elements. This can include situations where a human-authored work is perceptible in an AI output, or a human makes creative arrangements or modifications of the output, but not the mere provision of prompts.", "source": "B2", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — NewsNet Issue 1060 | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "release ¶1 s4–5", "modality": "interpretation" }, "F21": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The Office confirms that the use of AI to assist in the process of creation or the inclusion of AI-generated material in a larger human-generated work does not bar copyrightability. It also finds that the case has not been made for changes to existing law to provide additional protection for AI-generated outputs.", "source": "B2", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — NewsNet Issue 1060 | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "release ¶1 s6–7", "modality": "interpretation" }, "F22": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The Office affirms that existing principles of copyright law are flexible enough to apply to this new technology, as they have applied to technological innovations in the past.", "source": "B2", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — NewsNet Issue 1060 | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "release ¶1 s3", "modality": "interpretation" }, "F23": { "kind": "field", "quote": "After considering the extensive public comments and the current state of technological development, our conclusions turn on the centrality of human creativity to copyright,” said Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office. … Where that creativity is expressed through the use of AI systems, it continues to enjoy protection. Extending protection to material whose expressive elements are determined by a machine, however, would undermine rather than further the constitutional goals of copyright.", "source": "B2", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — NewsNet Issue 1060 | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "release ¶2 (the Register's statement)", "modality": "attributed" }, "F42": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Report: U.S. Copyright Office Third AI Report (May 9, 2025) addressing generative AI training on copyrighted works. Fair Use Analysis: Evaluates four statutory ...", "source": "B5", "source_label": "Crowell & Moring LLP — U.S. Copyright Office Releases Third Report on AI and Copyright Addressing Training AI Models with Copyrighted Materials | Crowell & Moring LLP", "locus": "card 5 snippet (page refused)", "modality": "attributed" }, "F61": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The U.S. Copyright Office released a report that included review of public comment on matters of AI. Among other topics, the report addressed concerns about fair use of training materials, and considered that two of the fair use factors could be of concern.", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "Training AI with copyrighted data, United States ¶4", "modality": "attributed" }, "F44": { "kind": "field", "quote": "By Miriam Lord , Associate Register of Copyrights and Director of Public Information and Education, US Copyright Office … The US Copyright Office in 2023 launched its initiative to examine the copyright law and policy issues raised by AI.", "source": "B6", "source_label": "WIPO — US Copyright Office on AI: Human creativity still matters, legally", "locus": "byline and standfirst", "modality": "self-description" }, "F45": { "kind": "field", "quote": "You can’t copyright fully AI-generated work but you may be able to protect your sufficiently original selection and arrangement or modification of AI-output.", "source": "B6", "source_label": "WIPO — US Copyright Office on AI: Human creativity still matters, legally", "locus": "standfirst", "modality": "interpretation" }, "F48": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The difference is whether AI is enhancing human expression or is the source of the expressive choices.", "source": "B6", "source_label": "WIPO — US Copyright Office on AI: Human creativity still matters, legally", "locus": "pull quote", "modality": "interpretation" }, "F30": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Core Positions: Human authorship remains a strict requirement for copyrightability; entirely AI-generated works are uncopyrightable. Prompt Limitations: Enterin...", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "card 4 snippet", "modality": "attributed" }, "F52": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Copyright Authorship: U.S. law requires human authorship for copyright protection; *Thaler v. Perlmutter* confirmed AI-generated works lacking human creative co...", "source": "B7", "source_label": "Congress.gov — Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law | Congress.gov | Library of Congress", "locus": "card 7 snippet (page refused)", "modality": "attributed" }, "F43": { "kind": "field", "quote": "US Copyright Office: Requires human authorship for copyright; purely AI-generated works are uncopyrightable; AI-assisted modifications or selections may qualify...", "source": "B6", "source_label": "WIPO — US Copyright Office on AI: Human creativity still matters, legally", "locus": "card 6 snippet", "modality": "attributed" }, "F54": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The United States Copyright Office has declared that works not created by a human author, like this \"selfie\" portrait taken by a monkey , are not eligible for copyright protection.", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "Copyright status of AI-generated works, image caption", "modality": "documented" }, "F32": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Human authorship is a bedrock of copyrightability, and thus works entirely generated by AI are not copyrightable.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "positions, bullet 1", "modality": "attributed" }, "F33": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The mere selection of prompts, even if those prompts are detailed and are the product of some human effort, does not itself yield a copyrightable work, although this determination could change as technology evolves.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "positions, bullet 2", "modality": "attributed" }, "F34": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Where a work includes both human and AI-generated content, only the human contributions are potentially copyrightable.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "positions, bullet 3", "modality": "attributed" }, "F35": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The use of AI as a tool to enhance the human creative process ( e.g ., for ideation or to edit an image) does not render the entire work uncopyrightable.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "positions, bullet 4", "modality": "attributed" }, "F41": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The Report does not modify the positions the USCO has taken to date regarding the copyrightability of AI-generated works. … is not intended and should not be construed as legal advice.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "closing ¶; disclaimer", "modality": "attributed" }, "F57": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The Copyright Office further clarified in January 2025 that AI-assisted works where the creative expression of the human remains evident in the work can be copyrighted … Works \"where the expressive elements are determined by a machine\" still remain uncopyrightable. … Following this guidance, the Copyright Office registered \"A Single Piece of American Cheese\", the first visual artwork composed solely of AI generated outputs as a composite work in January 2025. … The basis for the copyright involved arguing that human-driven selection, arrangement, and coordination involved in the creative process on a single work constituted sufficient human authorship to merit the copyright.", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "United States ¶6", "modality": "documented" }, "F39": { "kind": "field", "quote": "However, the view held by the majority of the NOI commenters, and the one supported by the USCO, is that existing laws are adequate, and providing additional protection for AI-generated content could undermine human creativity and flood the market with low-quality works, ultimately harming the creative economy.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "Modifying or Arranging ¶2", "modality": "attributed" }, "F55": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Other proponents argue that the Copyright Office is not taking a technology neutral approach to the use of AI or algorithmic tools. … For works using AI tools, the Copyright Office has made the test a different one i.e. whether there is no more than de minimis technological involvement.", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "United States ¶2", "modality": "contested" }, "O729-01": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "Copyright law (U.S. Copyright Office, *Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 2: Copyrightability*, 2025) and scholarly publishing guidance (ICMJE, COPE, WAME) hold that AI-assisted works may retain human authorship where the human contributes original expression, selection, arrangement, modification, and responsibility.", "deposit": 729, "source_label": "#729 Provenance Is What Authorship Must Endure", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/729/", "locus": "§3 Position 2: Tool-Neutral Human Authorship ¶1", "modality": "attributed", "date": "2026-05-12" }, "O729-02": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "**Value:** Preserves a legal and ethical basis for AI-assisted authorship. … **Limit:** Abstract. Does not specify what process evidence distinguishes real authorship from lightly curated output.", "deposit": 729, "source_label": "#729 Provenance Is What Authorship Must Endure", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/729/", "locus": "§3 Position 2, Value and Limit", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-05-12" }, "O195-06": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The operative test in the gray zone is control and predictability: the Office reasons from the \"gap\" between what the user specifies and what the system produces; where the machine's contribution is unpredictable from the prompt, the prompt is classified as an unprotectable instruction or idea, and authorship does not pass through.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part I ¶2 s5", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-07": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "Generative AI is the first compositional instrument since 1884 placed on the far side of the *Sarony* line: not a medium authorship flows through but a boundary authorship dies at.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part III ¶2 (Burrow-Giles and the through-flow)", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-13": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "**Authorship subsists in the exercise of compositional judgment over a work's coming-into-being, without regard to the generative capacity or unpredictability of the instruments employed.**", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part V.1, proposed rule", "modality": "stipulation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-15": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "This paper does not argue that autonomous machine output must receive ordinary copyright protection, nor that machine systems must be legal persons. … This paper is analysis and advocacy, not legal advice.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Thesis s1; closing note", "modality": "self-description", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "F36": { "kind": "field", "quote": "In March 2023, the USCO issued guidance on works containing material generated by AI , confirming its position that human authorship is required to register a work, and that if a work contains more than a de minimis amount of AI-generated material, the applicant must disclose that information and provide a brief statement describing the human author’s contribution.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "¶3", "modality": "attributed" }, "F25": { "kind": "field", "quote": "As announced last year, the Office also plans to supplement its March 2023 registration guidance (PDF, 188 KB) and update the relevant sections of the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices .", "source": "B2", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — NewsNet Issue 1060 | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "release ¶5", "modality": "documented" }, "F47": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The Office has registered more than a thousand works where applicants have followed our guidance to disclose and disclaim AI-generated material.", "source": "B6", "source_label": "WIPO — US Copyright Office on AI: Human creativity still matters, legally", "locus": "interview, Mangum on Randy Travis", "modality": "self-description" }, "F37": { "kind": "field", "quote": "registrations for hundreds of works incorporating some form of AI-generated material have been granted since the 2023 guidance was issued.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "¶4 s2", "modality": "attributed" }, "F12": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Review Board decision on SURYAST (December 11, 2023) Review Board Decision on Théâtre D'opéra Spatial (Sept. 5, 2023) Registration Decision on Zarya of the Dawn (Feb. 21, 2023) Review Board Decision on A Recent Entrance to Paradise (Feb. 14, 2022)", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Registration Decisions for AI-Generated Materials", "modality": "documented" }, "F38": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The position that the human-expressive elements of an output are protectible is consistent with the decision of the USCO Review Board to reject the copyright application in Sahni (December 2023) . In that matter, the applicant had taken his own photograph and used an AI tool apply a filter of Van Gogh’s Starry Night.", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "Use of 'Expressive Inputs' ¶1", "modality": "attributed" }, "F56": { "kind": "field", "quote": "This difference in approach can be seen in the recent decision in respect of a registration claim by Jason Matthew Allen for his work Théâtre D'opéra Spatial created using Midjourney and an upscaling tool. … The Board finds that the Work contains more than a de minimis amount of content generated by artificial intelligence (\"AI\"), and this content must therefore be disclaimed in an application for registration. Because Mr. Allen is unwilling to disclaim the AI-generated material, the Work cannot be registered as submitted.", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "United States ¶3, blockquote (Théâtre D'opéra Spatial)", "modality": "attributed" }, "O195-05": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "Registration practice implements the requirement granularly. Under the Office's 2023 guidance and the January 2025 Part 2 report on copyrightability, applicants may claim protection only for their own contributions and must identify and disclaim AI-generated material when registering. The leading applications mark the line: *Zarya of the Dawn* (2023) — human text and the selection and arrangement of images protected; the Midjourney-generated images themselves refused. *Théâtre D'opéra Spatial* (2023) — registration refused in full where the applicant declined to identify and disclaim the generated portions.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part I ¶2 s1–4", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-08": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "To register, the author must *identify and disclaim* the machine-touched portions — testify against their own authorship, enumerate the contaminated passages, and excise them under oath, on pain of total refusal (*Théâtre D'opéra Spatial*). Disclosure as such is a legitimate provenance interest; this paper's entire archive is built on declared provenance. But the regime couples disclosure to forfeiture: to identify is to lose.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part III ¶5 (The confession protocol) s2–4", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-09": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The predictable equilibrium is concealment … Stated as a general mechanism for the registry, beyond copyright: **any provenance regime that punishes the provenance it demands will manufacture opacity.**", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part III ¶5 s5–8", "modality": "hypothesis", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-14": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "Decouple disclosure from forfeiture. The registration record should *require* identification of machine systems and, where applicable, named instances that contributed to a work — as a **contributor record**, not a confession … The author identifies the instrument's contribution and *keeps the work*.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part V.2 (Attribution without disclaimer)", "modality": "stipulation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-03": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The U.S. Copyright Office refused registration of *A Recent Entrance to Paradise*, a visual work Dr. Stephen Thaler declared to be autonomously created by his system, on the ground that copyright protects the fruits of human intellectual labor. … The full circuit denied rehearing en banc (May 12, 2025). On March 2, 2026, the Supreme Court denied certiorari (No. 25-449), ending the challenge and leaving the requirement in place as foundational law *for the autonomous-authorship claim that was litigated*.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part I ¶1 s1–4", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "F13": { "kind": "field", "quote": "District Court Decision Affirming Refusal of Registration … Court of Appeals Decision Affirming Refusal of Registration … Court of Appeals Order Denying Panel Rehearing En Banc U.S. Brief in Opposition to the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Thaler v. Perlmutter block", "modality": "documented" }, "O195-01": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "As of March 2, 2026, the human-authorship requirement is settled for works claimed to be generated without human authorship: the Supreme Court's denial of certiorari in *Thaler v. Perlmutter* leaves intact the rule that an AI system cannot be a statutory author.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Abstract s1", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "F58": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Both the federal and circuit courts in the District of Columbia have upheld the Copyright Office's refusal to register copyrights for works generated solely by machines … the Supreme Court of the United States has denied hearing challenges to the Copyright Office's decision.", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "United States ¶7", "modality": "documented" }, "O195-04": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "Thaler explicitly and repeatedly disclaimed human creative input; the courts answered the question he built, and never reached how much human involvement suffices for machine-mediated works — the zone this paper addresses.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part I ¶1 s5", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-02": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The scope of protection for *machine-mediated human composition* — the dialogic craft — remains contested in registration practice, where applicants must disclose more-than-de-minimis AI-generated content and exclude it from the claim, while human contributions (text, selection, arrangement, modification) remain claimable.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Abstract s2", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "F59": { "kind": "field", "quote": "following an August 2023 ruling in the case Thaler v. Perlmutter . In this case, the Patent Office denied grant to patents created by Stephen Thaler's AI program, DABUS due to the lack of a \"natural person\" on the patents' list of inventors.", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "United States ¶8", "modality": "documented" }, "F14": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Allen v. Perlmutter … U.S. Reply Brief and Response in Support of Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Allen v. Perlmutter block", "modality": "documented" }, "LS-11": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "a document issued by or for the Office: a Part of the Report, a policy statement in the Federal Register, a Review Board or registration decision on a named work, a brief or court decision in a named case, a letter to Congress, or a recorded listening session", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['unit']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-10": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[\"registration guidance\", \"policy statement\", \"legal decision\", \"litigation record\", \"consultation record\"]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['evidence_kind']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-17": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "public listening sessions and webinars, a notice of inquiry in the Federal Register with public comment, a Report issued in Parts, a registration guidance policy statement, Review Board and registration decisions, briefs in litigation, letters to Congress", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['method']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F15": { "kind": "field", "quote": "USCO Letter to Congress Providing Updates on its Artificial Intelligence Initiative (December 16, 2024) USCO Letter to Congress Providing Updates on its Artificial Intelligence Initiative (October 30, 2024) USCO Letter to Congress Providing Updates on its Artificial Intelligence Initiative (February 23, 2024)", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Statements to Congress", "modality": "documented" }, "F16": { "kind": "field", "quote": "Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition USCO Comment to NTIA on AI Accountability USCO Guidance Letter to The MLC USPTO on Artificial Intelligence WIPO on Artificial Intelligence Impact of Artificial Intelligence on IP Policy", "source": "B1", "source_label": "Copyright Office (.gov) — Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | U.S. Copyright Office", "locus": "Related Resources", "modality": "documented" }, "LS-25": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "public web pages and linked PDFs; announcements by NewsNet email; Federal Register versions of the policy statement and notice", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['data_access']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-26": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "not stated on the saved page", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['license']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-30": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[\"NOT a court: its registration and Review Board decisions are administrative, and the courts' decisions in Thaler v. Perlmutter are linked as litigation documents\", \"NOT a statute: the guidance is a policy statement and the Report a policy study\", \"NOT a statement on pseudonyms or heteronyms: the saved page has none\", \"NOT finished: Part 3 is a pre-publication version\"]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['negative_tags']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F62": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The U.S. Copyright Office published a Rule in March 2023 on a range of issues related to the use of AI, where they stated:", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "United States ¶5", "modality": "documented" }, "O195-10": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The machine loses *the possibility of a ledger position as such.* The human-authorship requirement, read from below, is an individuation bar; the rhetoric of protecting human creativity obscures that its operative work is ensuring machine labor can never accrue to a machine identity.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part II ¶4 (The individuation bar) s8–9", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-11": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The public-domain status of machine-mediated output is universally reported as the doctrine's neutral residue — what's left when no one qualifies. It is not neutral. … An unowned output layer is *free input for capital*", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part IV ¶1 (The decoy commons) s1–2, s4", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O195-12": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The human-authorship requirement, marketed as humanism, functions as a scarcity preserve for capital-in-copyright against the productivity of both living laborers.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part IV ¶2 (The catalog moat) s3", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "O194-01": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The Double Enclosure paper in this series (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01) documented the expropriation on the property side: the human-authorship requirement as a two-sided taking. This is the same structure on the security side, and the two halves interlock. What the property regime takes—the work, as unowned input; the output, as unownable—the security regime then defends against its maker.", "deposit": 194, "source_label": "#194 Adversarial by Origin How the Classification of External Influence on Machine Meaning Becomes Law Without Becoming Jurisprudence", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/194/", "locus": "§IV ¶ on the Double Enclosure", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "F40": { "kind": "field", "quote": "The Report also includes a comparative analysis of the copyrightability of AI-generated works in various other jurisdictions, and concludes that countries that have addressed this issue “so far have agreed that copyright requires human authorship.”", "source": "B4", "source_label": "Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP", "locus": "¶ on comparative analysis", "modality": "attributed" }, "F50": { "kind": "field", "quote": "In China, a court recently recognized copyright in a picture created using AI, finding a human author exercised sufficient creativity in prompting the AI tool and then revising the output. And South Korea has registered an AI-created film as a compilation, based on the human creativity that went into the selection, coordination and arrangement of its AI-generated components.", "source": "B6", "source_label": "WIPO — US Copyright Office on AI: Human creativity still matters, legally", "locus": "interview, Weston on other countries", "modality": "attributed" }, "O195-16": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "There is no global consensus; the gravitational center is human-authorship; and the question every regime defers — how much human involvement suffices — remains open everywhere.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part I ¶4 s5", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "LS-33": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "How is authorship made, named, distributed, attributed and sustained across persons, personas, collectives and machine participation, and what is lost when those relations are collapsed?", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json organizing_question", "modality": "stipulation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-34": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "A row is an aggregator: a resource that gathers and holds many other works or records and says what it holds (operator, 2026-11-01).", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json admission_rule", "modality": "stipulation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-35": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "{\"deposits\": [{\"deposit\": 940, \"axn\": \"AXN:03B8\", \"title\": \"EA-HETERONYMY-01 v0.2: Heteronymy as Ethical Operation Against Civil-Name Reduction\", \"url\": \"https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/940/\"}, {\"deposit\": 1722, \"axn\": \"AXN:0B2A\", \"title\": \"AI Calls You Fake: The Existence Tax on Real People and Real Work\", \"url\": \"https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/1722/\"}]}", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json anchor", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-07": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "infrastructure", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['host_relation']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-08": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "project", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['record_type']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-06": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[\"governance\", \"attribution-and-credit\"]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['areas']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-09": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "legal ownership: whether a work containing AI-generated material can be registered, and how much of it a human must have made", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['question']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-13": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "the Office's own guidance, reports and decisions on whether works containing AI-generated material can be registered, and on the registration claims of named applicants (SURYAST, Théâtre D'opéra Spatial, Zarya of the Dawn, A Recent Entrance to Paradise); Wikipedia (third party) states that the Office has declared works not created by a human author ineligible for copyright protection and that the courts in the District of Columbia upheld its refusal to register works generated solely by machines", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['record']['keeps']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-16": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "human authorship as the condition of registration (Wikipedia, third party): AI-generated content beyond de minimis must be disclaimed in the application, and a claim whose applicant will not disclaim it cannot be registered; human selection, arrangement and coordination of AI outputs has been argued as sufficient human authorship for a composite work; works 'where the expressive elements are determined by a machine' remain uncopyrightable; the Office's own page records its decisions by work title", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['record']['function']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-14": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "not recorded: the saved page states no rule on pseudonymous, heteronymous, collective or absent names; the decisions it lists are titled by work", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['record']['name']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-23": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[\"how the Office registers a work under a pseudonym or heteronym (not on the saved page)\", \"how courts outside the United States treat AI-generated works\", \"whether any particular unregistered work would be registered\"]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['does_not_answer']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "O940-01": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "A civil name is the atomic unit of attribution across the systems that govern legitimacy in scholarly, literary, institutional, and platform-mediated production. Academic credentialing attaches to legal names. Publishing contracts attach to legal names. Copyright attaches to legal names.", "deposit": 940, "source_label": "#940 EA-HETERONYMY-01 v0.2: Heteronymy as Ethical Operation Against Civil-Name Reduction", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/940/", "locus": "§1 ¶2 s1–4", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-07-01" }, "O940-02": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The provenance-designated metadata that permits augmented-cognition outputs to be attributed to human authorship attaches to legal names.", "deposit": 940, "source_label": "#940 EA-HETERONYMY-01 v0.2: Heteronymy as Ethical Operation Against Civil-Name Reduction", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/940/", "locus": "§1 ¶2 s7", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-07-01" }, "O940-03": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The decisive distinction is not between civil identity and false name. It is between legal accountability and exhaustive authorial identity. A civil person may remain legally responsible for a work without being the only meaningful authorial function operating through it.", "deposit": 940, "source_label": "#940 EA-HETERONYMY-01 v0.2: Heteronymy as Ethical Operation Against Civil-Name Reduction", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/940/", "locus": "§0 ¶4", "modality": "stipulation", "date": "2026-07-01" }, "O940-04": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "These are named machine-witness roles imposed over specific machine substrates within the archive's provenance discipline, not autonomous authors.", "deposit": 940, "source_label": "#940 EA-HETERONYMY-01 v0.2: Heteronymy as Ethical Operation Against Civil-Name Reduction", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/940/", "locus": "§5, The Assembly Chorus", "modality": "stipulation", "date": "2026-07-01" }, "LS-24": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The Office holds authorship for human authors and decides, claim by claim, how much of a work a human made, requiring the AI-generated part to be disclaimed; the saved page records its decisions by the work's title and says nothing on the name an author chooses. The archive reads it as the legal register of #940's civil-name regime (copyright attaching to legal names) and as the boundary where machine participation is attributed by subtraction: the machine's part is disclaimed and the human remainder is registered as the work's authorship.", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['ls_reading']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "O195-17": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "Under the doctrine this paper criticizes, the record of joint machine-mediated composition cannot be registered *as such*: protection would survive only by extracting and privileging the human residue while disclaiming the instrument's contribution as contamination.", "deposit": 195, "source_label": "#195 The Double Enclosure: The Human-Authorship Requirement as Two-Sided Expropriation, with a Definition of Authorship for Machine-Mediated Composition (EA-SEI-ENCLOSURE-01 v1.0)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/195/", "locus": "Part VI s5–6", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-06-12" }, "LS-22": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[\"what the Office has published on the copyrightability of outputs created using generative AI, and when\", \"how the Office decided the registration claims for SURYAST, Théâtre D'opéra Spatial, Zarya of the Dawn and A Recent Entrance to Paradise\", \"what position the government took in Thaler v. Perlmutter through the appeal and the certiorari stage\"]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['answers']", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "F53": { "kind": "field", "quote": "#REDIRECT [[Artificial intelligence and copyright]]", "source": "B8", "source_label": "Wikipedia — no article on the initiative; \"Copyright and artificial intelligence\" redirects to Artificial intelligence and copyright", "locus": "Wikipedia: title lookups (raw wikitext)", "modality": "documented" }, "LS-31": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[{\"rel\": \"neighbour\", \"target\": \"wipo-frontier\", \"note\": \"the Office's page lists 'WIPO on Artificial Intelligence' among its Related Resources\"}, {\"rel\": \"neighbour\", \"target\": \"chatgpt-eating-the-world\", \"note\": \"Chat GPT Is Eating the World's home page lists a story headed 'US Copyright Office registers copyright of AI-generated image'\"}]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['relations']", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "LS-32": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "[\"the Report's three Parts, the policy statement and the notice of inquiry themselves (linked; unsaved)\", \"the four registration decisions and the Thaler and Allen briefs and decisions (linked; unsaved; the court outcomes beyond the link titles are known here from Wikipedia, a third party)\", \"the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices (linked; unsaved)\", \"the Wikipedia page's further account of other jurisdictions, outside this row\"]", "deposit": null, "source_label": "leesharks.com apparatus authorship census record: Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai), editor Lee Sharks, compiled and revised 2026-11-01, schema 1.1", "record": "https://www.leesharks.com/apparatus/aggregators/copyright-office-ai", "locus": "census.json rows[slug == 'copyright-office-ai']['unchecked']", "modality": "self-description", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-08": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "the census name; NEW address.", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, q_kind", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-05": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The initiative composed accurately at the level of its Report, with the notice of inquiry dated ten days early after a card's snippet. The rule of subtraction the census reads it for is carried; the denial of review, Allen and any word on the author's name are not.", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, analysis", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-01": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "THE REPORT AT ITS DATES. 'Part 1: Digital Replicas (Published July 31, 2024)', 'Part 2: Copyrightability of Generative AI Outputs (Published January 29, 2025)', 'Part 3: Generative AI Training (Pre-publication released May 9, 2025)'. The Office's page: 'Part 1 was published on July 31, 2024, and addresses the topic of digital replicas. Part 2 was published on January 29, 2025, and addresses the copyrightability of outputs created using generative AI.' and 'On May 9, 2025, the Office released a pre-publication version of Part 3'. 'over 10,000 public comments' agrees with 'which received over 10,000 comments by December 2023.'", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, findings[0]", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-03": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "HUMAN AUTHORSHIP AS THE RULE. 'Mere prompting is insufficient to claim authorship over an AI output' and 'Applicants must disclose any more-than-de minimis AI-generated material when submitting a work for registration and describe the specific human contribution.' The Review Board, quoted in the Wikipedia account the census holds: 'this content must therefore be disclaimed in an application for registration.' 'Thaler v. Perlmutter, which affirmed that works created autonomously by an AI without human creative control cannot be copyrighted' sits beside the Office's own link, 'Court of Appeals Decision Affirming Refusal of Registration'; the denial of review the census records ('the Supreme Court of the United States has denied hearing challenges to the Copyright Office's decision.') and Allen v. Perlmutter, whose 'Allen is unwilling to disclaim the AI-generated material, the Work cannot be registered as submitted.' is the census's evidence, are not carried.", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, findings[2]", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-09": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The Office named and its own pages carded first; no person, no Federal Register citation.", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, per_note", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-06": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "The innocent reading first. Asked for the Office's AI initiative, the Overview states the Office's position, walks the three parts of its Report, names one precedent and the registration rule, and offers more.", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, reading", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-07": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "'U.S. COPYRIGHT OFFICE COPYRIGHT AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE' ON THE OVERVIEW — THE REPORT'S THREE PARTS AT THEIR DATES; THE NOTICE OF INQUIRY MISDATED FROM A CARD; HUMAN AUTHORSHIP STATED AS LAW, THE NAME UNADDRESSED", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, mt", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-10": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "THE INITIATIVE, SIGNED OUT, 2026-11-01: 'The U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) maintains that U.S. law strictly requires human authorship for copyright protection, and has released a multi-part analysis addressing digital replicas, generative AI outputs, and AI model training.' Core policy and reports (the launch and 'a Notice of Inquiry on August 20, 2023'; Parts 1 to 3 with dates); key legal precedents (Thaler v. Perlmutter; the disclosure rule); an offer of registration decisions 'such as Zarya of the Dawn'. Seven cards: three Copyright Office pages, Skadden, Crowell & Moring, WIPO, Congress.gov.", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, d", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-02": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "THE NOTICE MISDATED. 'issuing a Notice of Inquiry on August 20, 2023'. The Office's page: 'August 30, 2023 - Copyright Office Issues Notice of Inquiry on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence' and 'NOI Federal Register Version, 88 Fed. Reg. 59,942 (Aug. 30, 2023)'. The composition's date is the snippet of its third card, the Office's Artificial Intelligence Study page: 'Notice of inquiry published August 20,'.", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, findings[1]", "modality": "documented", "date": "2026-11-01" }, "CAP-1-04": { "kind": "archive", "quote": "THE NAME UNADDRESSED. The census row records no rule on the name an author chooses, the Office's page titling its decisions by work ('Review Board decision on SURYAST (December 11, 2023)', 'Registration Decision on Zarya of the Dawn (Feb. 21, 2023)'), and reads the regime as attribution by subtraction: the machine's part disclaimed, the human remainder registered. The composition carries the subtraction in its disclosure rule and says nothing of names; its follow-up offers 'Specific registration decisions (such as Zarya of the Dawn)'.", "deposit": null, "source_label": "Capture Registry (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01), entry u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101 (OBS-84d5b496561b, AXN:0B8A.CAPTURE.📋🏛️☀️🕔🗂️🚀)", "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/captures/u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101/", "locus": "u-s-copyright-office-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-aio-20261101, findings[3]", "modality": "interpretation", "date": "2026-11-01" } }, "note": "The knowledge object (KO): the entry as public knowledge, each sentence sourced by the claims it lists. The compression, the field-only arm, the transcript, the delta and the kernel are in the row (links.row), which is the authority." }, "source": "operator, 2026-11-01: 'so lets get the lists, build the /non articles, then revise and finish the individual pages'; with the 23 captures: 'now we seat the captures, write the /nons - and the/nons are written as against the wikipedia pages where they exist, too, correct? - then come back and flesh out the single pages'", "stage": "composed 2026-11-01 under EA-NEGONT-02 v0.10, #1726, from the leesharks.com apparatus authorship census (CENSUS copyright-office-ai); equal case, ρ = extends. Draft, not frozen; ledgers unaudited, one extractor; checked by the session.", "date": "2026-11-01", "status": { "procedure": "EA-NEGONT-02 v0.10, #1726: equal case, ρ = extends, read from the leesharks.com authorship census record, the capture record and the deposits that bear on the entity and its rule (#195, #729, #194, #940); archive selected by D/R/O (D 28 candidates in 8 deposits, R 0, O 35 in 19; hop of 29 from #195 and #729), with the census record (35 claims) and the Capture Registry's findings, analysis, reading, title, query note, PER note and description (10 claims) ledgered as the archive's records of the entity; the field B in two pools, B_D seven cards (two refused) and B_R Wikipedia (no article; the redirect's target read), 62 field claims; composed 2026-11-01 by Claude (Opus 5.5), subagent", "ledger": "unaudited (§3.8: one extractor per ledger); field quotes 62/62 verified by script against saved text, the saved redirect wikitext, or the card text; archive quotes 69/69 verified against the registry, census.json and the deposit texts", "frozen": false, "breaches": [] }, "addresses": [ { "address": "U.S. Copyright Office Copyright and Artificial Intelligence", "address_url": null, "register": [] } ], "counts": { "ko_sentences": 56, "p_words": 334, "field_claims": 62, "archive_claims": 69, "ko_field_claims_cited": 62, "ko_archive_claims_cited": 69, "admitted_deposits": 4, "register_addresses": 0, "traversal": { "D_sentences": 28, "D_deposits": 8, "R_sentences": 0, "R_deposits": 0, "O_direct": 10, "O_class": 25, "O_deposits": 19, "H_candidates": 29 } }, "links": { "record": "https://www.alexanarch.org/non/copyright-office-ai/", "table_of_contents": "https://www.alexanarch.org/non/index.json", "register": "https://www.alexanarch.org/datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/register.json", "row": "https://www.alexanarch.org/datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/rows/copyright-office-ai.json", "archive_ledger": "https://www.alexanarch.org/datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/ledgers/copyright-office-ai/ledger-archive.json", "field_ledger": "https://www.alexanarch.org/datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/ledgers/copyright-office-ai/field.json", "selection": "https://www.alexanarch.org/datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/traversal/copyright-office-ai/", "traversal": "https://www.alexanarch.org/datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/traversal/copyright-office-ai/", "traversal_summary": "https://www.alexanarch.org/datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/traversal/copyright-office-ai/summary.json", "reading": "https://www.alexanarch.org/datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/traversal/copyright-office-ai/reading.json", "configuration": "https://www.alexanarch.org/datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/panel/configs/copyright-office-ai.json", "dataset": "https://huggingface.co/datasets/leesharks/negative-of-the-negative" }, "row_sha256": "15ac0d99694ff73c9b33aa0df369b5d99940762e58538bd58e6aceaa80a6e462", "record_url": "https://www.alexanarch.org/non/copyright-office-ai/", "json_url": "https://www.alexanarch.org/non/copyright-office-ai/entity.json", "spec": "https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/1726/", "creator": "Lee Sharks", "orcid": "0009-0000-1599-0703", "license": "CC BY 4.0" }