Explore decisions at the intersection of creativity, technology and rights. Filter cases by region, jurisdiction or topic. Trace the findings back to an official legal source.
5 records
European Union · 2009Court judgment
Infopaq International v Danske Dagblades Forening
C-5/08 · 16 July 2009
The Court examined whether short newspaper extracts may constitute reproduction in part. Original elements reflecting the author’s intellectual creation can receive copyright protection.
Why it matters. An important starting point for originality and the legal treatment of text extraction.
Procedure and source details
Status: Judgment delivered
Judgment of the Court of Justice; it does not decide whether generative AI training is lawful.
The UK Supreme Court held that a machine cannot be named as an inventor under the Patents Act 1977; owning an AI system does not by itself establish entitlement to a patent for its output.
Why it matters. Illustrates the question of legal recognition for AI-generated invention. This is a patent case, not a copyright-authorship ruling.
Procedure and source details
Status: Supreme Court judgment
Final UK Supreme Court judgment on patents; not a ruling about copyright in AI-generated artwork.
The US Copyright Office concluded that the human-authored text and selection, coordination, and arrangement of a comic book could qualify for protection, while Midjourney-generated images lacked the requisite human authorship for registration.
Why it matters. A practical illustration of how registration treats mixed human and AI-generated material.
Procedure and source details
Status: Registration limited
Administrative copyright registration determination, not a court judgment. See the Office’s February 2023 registration decision.
In proceedings concerning access to publicly available profile data, the Ninth Circuit considered whether the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act barred hiQ’s access in the context of preliminary-injunction relief.
Why it matters. Shows how automated data collection intersects with cybersecurity law and platform control.
Procedure and source details
Status: Preliminary-injunction appeal
An interlocutory appellate decision; not a final resolution of every claim in the dispute.
We distinguish court judgments, preliminary procedural rulings and administrative decisions. A party’s allegations are not court findings. A case about patents is not automatically precedent on copyright. Each entry provides the decision date, jurisdiction, its procedural character and a link to an official primary source.
This is a curated educational starting point rather than a comprehensive legal database or legal advice. Dates and procedural status reflect the particular linked decision; subsequent proceedings may exist. Last reviewed: 19 October 2026.