I'm still not sure how I feel about the actual copyright issue, but this was a bad test case. Thaler is trying to have his cake and eat it too; his position is inconsistent (this similar to a previous comment I've made: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34783707).
He wants credit for creating the AI, and he wants to that AI to be recognized as autonomous and independent by getting the Copyright Office's imprimatur. But at the same time he wants to treat the art created by the AI as if it were his, or at least to act on behalf of the AI as if it were not autonomous.
I've started using the best AI work I could find in all my works too, without attribution, and it makes me money. I recently added AI music to a website, which I found on youtube and got with a youtube downloading script, really drives engagement
I also don't care if someone does the same to works I generated in Midjourney, which I display in my various presentations. The Executive branch and now Judicial branch are pretty clear about this (so far), so its a free for all
He wants credit for creating the AI, and he wants to that AI to be recognized as autonomous and independent by getting the Copyright Office's imprimatur. But at the same time he wants to treat the art created by the AI as if it were his, or at least to act on behalf of the AI as if it were not autonomous.