The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed creative expression, enabling non-human systems to generate sophisticated visual arts, literature, music, and software code. This paper examines the legal challenges posed by AI-generated content within the framework of contemporary copyright law, focusing on the fundamental requirement of human authorship. Traditional intellectual property frameworks, including international treaties such as the Berne Convention as well as national legislation in India, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, are fundamentally anthropocentric. As a result, the emergence of autonomous AI creators leaves significant doctrinal gaps regarding legal ownership, originality thresholds, and liability. Through a comparative doctrinal analysis, this study investigates whether existing legal principles can accommodate AI output or if specialized regulatory approaches are necessary. The finding indicates that while human-assisted AI creations can fit within existing copyright paradigms by attributing authorship to human contributors, fully autonomous AI creations lack human agency and cannot be granted copyright without undermining core principles of copyright law. To address this void without stifling technological innovation, the study evaluates emerging models such as sui generis rights, neighbouring rights, and contractual licensing. Ultimately, the paper recommends against recognizing AI as a legal author, advocating instead for a dedicated sui generis framework granting ten years of protection from first publication, so as to incentivize innovation while preserving the moral and theoretical integrity of human-centric copyright protection.