Chinese and English archive texts include AI-assisted translations, not independently human-reviewed. Consult the original-language sources alongside them.
The Board finds that AI-generated content must be excluded and that Allen refuses exclusion, so the application cannot be registered as submitted. It makes no final determination on the independent copyrightability of his Photoshop edits.
What changed
The Board finds that AI-generated content must be excluded and that Allen refuses exclusion, so the application cannot be registered as submitted. It makes no final determination on the independent copyrightability of his Photoshop edits.
Institutional context, not an artist’s anti-AI position. This is neither a finding that all human edits lack copyright nor a court judgment. The 2022 award controversy needs separate evidence.
Editorial research question
Editorial interpretation: distinguish competition recognition from copyright registration; the applicant argues for protection of AI-assisted work.
This is an editorial interpretation or question, separate from factual statements.
Evidence & sources
The Board finds that AI-generated content must be excluded and that Allen refuses exclusion, so the application cannot be registered as submitted. It makes no final determination on the independent copyrightability of his Photoshop edits.
SRC-0118PDF pages 1–5: second-review decision, procedural history and reservation concerning Photoshop work
United States Copyright Office · EN · 2023-09-05
Case
Related documents
DOC-0106Théâtre D’opéra Spatial Review Board DecisionCite this record
ANTI-AI ARCHIVE. “Review Board upholds refusal to register Allen’s work.” evt-0119. Include this page’s URL and your access date when citing.