A banana duct-taped to a wall sold for $6.2 million, and Maurizio Cattelan’s work “Comedian” has been deemed one of the most “talked about works of the century.” Art generated by artificial intelligence has been labeled “the banana taped to the wall of the digital world.” Human authorship is necessary to receive copyright protection, something entirely AI-generated works cannot satisfy. However, some AI-generated works demonstrate a greater degree of human involvement, and copyright law has moved toward recognizing some of those works as worthy of protection. The question of how much human involvement is enough to meet the authorship standard is left open for interpretation, dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Without a guiding framework, the existing approach remains riddled with uncertainty, causing some creators to hide their use of AI or avoid experimenting with new technologies. Copyright law is designed to “secure a fair return for an author’s creative labor” with the ultimate aim of “stimulat[ing] artistic creativity for the general public good.” The following research examines guidance from the U.S. Copyright Office on the copyrightability of AI-generated works and proposes a principled framework for evaluating human authorship.