As generative AI tools like ChatGPT, DALL·E, Midjourney, and others become mainstream in workplaces across industries, companies are facing a new frontier of copyright law. These platforms are being used to create everything from marketing materials and code to translations, product descriptions, and more. But as adoption increases, so do the legal risks—especially in the realm of intellectual property.

Who Owns the Output?

One of the key questions arising from the use of generative AI is ownership. If an employee uses an AI platform to create a marketing pitch, graphic, or piece of code, who owns that content—the employee, the company, or the AI provider? Courts and regulators are still catching up, and the answer often depends on terms of service, employment contracts, and the specific use case.

Infringement Risks in AI-Generated Content

Another challenge lies in how generative AI models are trained. Many large language and image models are built using massive datasets scraped from the internet, often without explicit permission from copyright holders. This raises serious questions:

• Does using AI-generated content expose your company to copyright infringement?
• Could your marketing materials, presentations, or product copy unintentionally replicate protected works?
• Are there liability issues tied to how the models were trained?

Both the creation and use of AI-generated outputs carry potential infringement risks. Companies must be cautious in deploying such content publicly or incorporating it into proprietary materials.

Is AI-Created Content Even Copyrightable?

The U.S. Copyright Office has made it clear: copyright protection only applies to works created by humans. This means content generated autonomously by AI—with minimal human input—may not qualify for protection under U.S. copyright law. If your business relies on AI-generated assets, it’s critical to understand how this impacts your ability to protect those assets from being copied or reused.

The Warhol Decision: What It Might Mean for AI

In Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith, the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on transformative use—a central concept in copyright’s fair use doctrine. Although the case dealt with human-created art, its implications may ripple into the AI world. If AI-generated works are deemed derivative or not sufficiently transformative, they may not be protected—or worse, may infringe on underlying source material. This decision adds another layer of complexity for companies looking to adopt AI tools safely and strategically.

Takeaways for Businesses

As generative AI becomes a more common tool in the modern workforce, companies must take proactive steps to manage the legal risks:

• Establish clear internal policies governing employee use of AI tools.
• Review platform terms of use for ownership and licensing clauses.
• Vet all AI-generated outputs for potential infringement before public release.
• Consult legal counsel on issues of copyrightability and compliance.
• Stay informed on legal developments as the courts and agencies continue to define the rules.

The future of AI-driven content creation is here—but navigating it requires more than innovation. It demands careful legal foresight.

If your company is integrating generative AI into its operations or content workflows, our team can help you build a compliant, forward-looking strategy. Contact us today to discuss how we can protect your business in this evolving landscape.

‍