January 31, 2025
World Trademark Review
The U.S. Copyright Office issued the second part of its policy report concerning copyright and artificial intelligence (AI). The office’s findings include:
The office also maintains that generative AI prompts, “based on the functioning of current generally available technology,” do not constitute sufficient human authorship for the purposes of copyright protection, as they “do not alone provide sufficient control” over outputs.
Finnegan partner and leader of the firm’s copyright practice, Anna Chauvet told World Trademark Review that by qualifying its position that AI prompts alone — “based on the functioning of current generally available technology” — do not constitute human authorship, “The office thus acknowledged the possibility that prompt engineering may become sophisticated enough to exert sufficient creative control, leaving the door to copyrightability open.”
Read “AI Prompts Alone Are Not Human Authorship, Long-Awaited US Copyright Office Report Declares”
Commentary
Heartflow Accuses Rival of Building Competing AI Heart Tech on Stolen Secrets
April 23, 2026
Commentary
‘Efficiency Enhancers, Not Revenue Disruptors’: Lawyers Analyse USPTO’s AI Trademark Tools
April 17, 2026
Commentary
What xAI’s Challenge to California’s Generative AI Disclosure Law Means for Trade Secrets
January 6, 2026
Press Release
December 23, 2025
Award/Ranking
Finnegan’s Munich Office Climbs in the 2025 JUVE Patent Germany Patent Litigation Rankings
October 31, 2025
Award/Ranking
Finnegan’s Munich Office Earns Recognition in 2026 Best Law Firms – Germany Rankings
September 25, 2025
Commentary
Finnegan’s New AI Practice Is a Project in ‘Interdisciplinary’ Expertise
September 12, 2025
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.