Big AI Implications Lurk in the Supreme Court’s Andy Warhol Verdict | Analysis. Pro Available to WrapPRO members. The perennial “fair use” debate as it applies to computer-generated art just ...

In a move that could complicate the legal status of AI systems trained on existing visual artworks, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled Thursday that Andy Warhol’s 1984 work “Orange ...

Last week’s bombshell U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Andy Warhol “fair use” infringement case represents a human shot across the AI bow, even if AI wasn’t mentioned. Warhol’s Prince ...

The U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith sent ripples through the legal and artistic communities. Months later, legal scholars and art journalists continue to debate ...

Experts agree that it is impossible to predict how the Supreme Court would rule, should a case related to generative AI and copyrighted training data come before the nine justices. But either way ...

Michelle Guida, Purdue University's Krach Institute for Tech Diplomacy CEO, joins 'Squawk Box' to discuss how artificial ...

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a challenge by computer scientist Stephen Thaler to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's refusal to issue patents for inventions his artificial ...

A federal appeals court ruled that art created autonomously by artificial intelligence cannot be copyrighted, saying that at ...

The court denied Stephen Thaler’s request to name the AI system DABUS as an inventor, following a similar decision made by the US Patent and Trademark Office.

A US court has ruled AI-generated art cannot be copyrighted, in a case related to one currently heading through the UK Supreme Court. The case was brought by 73-year-old computer scientist Stephen ...

The UK Supreme Court today rejected a bid by computer scientist Stephen Thaler to patent several inventions churned out by an AI he claims to own. Thaler used his "creativity machine," known as ...