The future is already here, and with progress and the advance of new technologies, new questions arise for brands and business owners. Artificial Intelligence is a great tool, and nowadays there is a myriad of options at our disposal thanks to it, especially with Gen AI, but where is the limit? When does the use of this tool become counterproductive for us and our businesses?

As a graphic design company, we get the question a lot: “Why would I pay for a logo when I can ask AI to create one for me?” and beyond matters of quality and personalization, there is a far simpler truth: you are purchasing ownership, something AI cannot grant you.

Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law in the US

There is no big secret to how AI is trained, and contrary to what most people would think, a Generative AI system is not designed to create new things; it is designed to imitate human creation, generating products that look like the data it was trained on, already made by other people, and often already copyrighted.

On the other hand, the U.S. Copyright Act affords copyright protection to “original works of authorship.” Even while the U.S. Constitution and Copyright Act do not explicitly define who or what can be qualified as an “author,” U.S. courts have not recognized copyright in works that lack a human author to this date, including works created autonomously by AI systems.

The U.S. Congressional Research Service has previously stated that, under the assumption that copyrightable works require a human author, works created by humans with the assistance of generative AI might be entitled to copyright protection depending on the nature of human involvement in the creative process, which is what people often claim when they say they are the author or an AI-generated image or logo, as they are the person who “directed” the process through prompts. However, the U.S. Copyright Office, as well as several courts on the matter, conclude on the fact that AI systems are not considered an author, and without real creative direction and the production of an original idea, there is no copyright. Concerning this, the European Union Intellectual Property Office establishes several factors to determine if images generated through Artificial Intelligence tools can be subjected to copyright, with the main points stressing that the main element is real authorship by a human, who would be the one who can claim copyright over the image.

In light of these several considerations, the U.S. Copyright Office does not extend copyright or trademark protection over these designs, as they end up being a derivative of an already original creation with which the used system was trained to produce similar images and understand concepts. Far from artistic or ethical concerns about Gen-AI, the copyright matter boils down to the consideration that something created with artificial intelligence is a derivative of something already existent, something created by someone else, and therefore, something the person providing the prompt cannot own, as they are considered public domain.

So what is the difference between Gen-AI and a logo a designer made for me?

The defining element between a logo made by something else (Gen-AI, in this case), and someone else (such as a designer or company you hired) is that through agreements, you become the owner of the design, through real, paid, verifiable ownership, which makes you able to extend copyright over designs, even if they were made by someone else, you explicitly own the logo as a fulfillment of a commercial agreement.

You purchased a design and directed the process with feedback, ideas, and references, which, through human creation and creativity, became a logo, demonstrable before the U.S. Copyright Office, therefore copyrightable and able to represent your business while you take it right to the top.