aceMan with Machine: The Unaddressed Copyright Issues of Mixed Musical Works
The copyrightability of mixed musical works, which contain a blend of human and generative AI elements, is an issue of increasing prevalence in copyright law. While there has been some discussion on the copyright status of fully generative AI works, this mainly resides in state law, and much of the federal policy found in Copyright Guides published by the United States Copyright Office is a non-binding opinion. Additionally, the same circuit courts contradict themselves, as seen with the differing views on the f…
Simultaneous Hybrid of Musical Improvisation and Bioart, Elvin Flamingo, mixed media, performance, 2016-2017, Narodowe Forum Muzyki, Wrocław, 2016 by Elvin Flamingo. CC BY 4.0 · https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
A May 2026 law review article examines mixed musical works that contain a blend of human and generative AI elements, arguing they occupy a copyright 'Dead Man's Land' in the United States. It describes a landscape where federal guidance is non-binding and circuit courts issue contradictory fair-use rulings, forcing the U.S. Copyright Office to inspect mixed works on a case-by-case basis.
The issue matters because more artists are creating mixed musical works, making the inefficient case-by-case approach increasingly untenable for registration and enforcement. The article proposes a legislative fix to itemize work components and limit AI use to one component, but as of publication this remains a proposal with no evidence of adoption or effectiveness, and the underlying legal contradictions remain unresolved.
- Article focuses on mixed musical works defined as a blend of human and generative AI elements, distinct from fully generative works.
- Federal guidance is limited to Copyright Guides published by the United States Copyright Office described as non-binding opinion.
- Ninth Circuit cases Bartz v. Anthropic PBC (2024) and Kadrey v. Meta (2023) are cited as showing contradictory views on fair use of generative AI works.
- Proposed remedy is Congressional legislation itemizing components of mixed musical works and allowing generative AI in only one component, alongside integrating state legislation.
Mixed musical works that blend human and generative AI elements fall into a copyright 'Dead Man's Land' where the U.S. Copyright Office must inspect works case-by-case, creating an inefficient and ineffective process.
The rundown
The paper notes that discussion of fully generative AI works mainly resides in state law, while federal policy is limited to non-binding Copyright Office guides, and cites conflicting Ninth Circuit fair-use decisions in Bartz v. Anthropic PBC (2024) and Kadrey v. Meta (2023).
To resolve the case-by-case inspection mess, it proposes Congress pass legislation itemizing components of mixed musical works and permitting generative AI in only one component, integrated with state legislation, to create a unified evaluation framework.
Sources
- Peer-reviewedThe Undergraduate Law Review at UC San Diego2026-05-13
How should this claim be treated?
The debate