ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE AND
COPYRIGHT
DEFINING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
• Artificial intelligence (“AI”) is a set of techniques or instructions that are aimed to simulate
some aspect of biological cognition using machines. Early computer scientists theorized
the use of abstract symbols combined with logical reasoning as a way to simulate AI.
• For example, early computer scientists used basic algorithms to successfully create
programs that utilized heuristics, or “rules of thumb,” that could help them accomplish
tasks like running through a maze.
• However, because of the complexity and cost of computer technology, many of the other
AI theories did not yield any fruitful results.
• Nowadays, almost all AI techniques are based on a technique ctechnemachine learning.
• Machine learning uses computer algorithms that can “learn” or improve performance
over time on a specific task. These algorithms allow the AI to figure out the best way to
accomplish the assigned task without needing to be pre-programmed with specific
instructions.
ABSTRACT
• In the last few years, the world has witnessed the generation of
creative works by artificial intelligence.
• autonomous creations by intelligent non-human agents brings to the
fore issues that have sparked debate in intellectual property law.
• issues that have been discussed range from the problems dealing with
authorship by non-human intelligent agents and duration of copyright
created by artificial intelligence.
• the question that has different schools of thought giving different
answers is :ARE AI PRODUCED WORKS ELIGIBLE FOR COPYRIGHT
PROTECTION IN VIEW OF THE NON-HUMAN AUTHOR?
INTRODUCTION
• The history and development of AI as an industry is well documented.
• there has been a notable increase in autonomy of machines and computers which
rely on algorithms that are self-teaching as opposed to programmes fed with
commands to perform a task.
• in the former, human intervention or “labour, skill and effort” is minimal or non-
existent and the computer is responsible for the decision making process where a
work is created.
• in the latter, it is admitted thathuman intervention is substantial and the
computer is merely a tool used to create a work.
• with the increase of AI, we are entering an era of digital authorship and the
interrogation of authorship is important to determine in whom the copyright
vests.
INTRODUCTION CTD
• This discussion will be two-pronged: Interrogating the “pragmatic
approach” by examining whether or not an intelligent agent can be
taken as an author under copyright law (comparisons will be drawn
from CHina and Malaysia) and a “theoratical approach” which
interrogates whether an intelligent agent should be regarded as an
author as envisaged by copyright law.
• challenges arising from AI produced works and their interaction with
Copyright law will also need to be addressed.
ORIGINALITY AND AI
• a prerequisite for a literary, artistic or musical work for eligibility for
protection under copyright is that a work must be original. this
essentially means that the expression of the idea embodying the work
must originate from the author. it must not be a copy of another work.
the author is therefore the creator of the work.
• a question that needs be answered in relation to this definition with
regards to AI works is the source of the work.
• if human intervention or input establishes sufficient effort, then it
follows that the researchers are authors of the work.
• if the work is created by an intelligent agent autonomously, wholly at its
own will then the machine is the source of the work.
ORIGINALITY AND AI CTD
• An issue has been raised by some scholars, who argue that AI works cannot be original
because the intelligent agent is fed with a lot of data from which the work derives.
• what is the danger of this view in light of the fact that originality does not mean
novelty of thought and idea and also that infringement of copyright in making another
work does not nullify/cancel out copyright subsisting in the work created whilst
infringing on an existing work?????
• an analysis of the Romantic Theory of authorship in the traditinal sense is therefore
necessary to assist in interrogating the issue of originality and AI works.
• An AI-produced work may be ‘original’ so long as the work is created by the intelligent
agent with sufficient effort demonstrated during the process of making the work.
• This is due regardless of the fact that the intelligent agent was fed with data before it
created the work, similar to situations where a human author is involved
AUTHORSHIP OF AI PRODUCED
WORKS
• Can a non-human entity be an author?.
• an understanding of the cncept of authorship read through the Romantic
Theory of Authorship is that an author imbues or leaves an imprint of
their personality in their work.
• The Lockean theory, also labours under an understanding that the
author is human but argues that authors should be awarded for their
efforts spent in creating works.
• having laid this foundation, the question is whether or not originality of
a work must be traced back to a human entity.
THE PROBLEM OF PERPERTUITY OF
COPYRIGHT SUBSISTING IN AI WORKS
•M
COPYRIGHT ACT AND NON-HUMAN AUTHORS
• The determining factor is whether the expression of ideas originates
from the intelligent agent or the researchers developing it.
• If the intelligent agent operates like a mere amanuensis, no question
of it as the author should arise
•
NARUTO V SLATER
• In that case, human photographer, David Slater, left his camera unattended in
a wildlife reserve in Sulawesi, Indonesia.A crested macaque monkey, Naruto,
found the camera and began taking selfie photographs.
• Slater took the pictures and published them in a book in which he described
the selfies of Naruto as “[p]osing to take its own photograph, unworried by its
own reflection, smiling. Surely a sign of self-awareness?”
• The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that since
animals are not human, Naruto lacked subject matter jurisdiction under Article
III of the Constitution and failed to state a claim under the Copyright Act.
• The court made no remark regarding how it would have ruled had Naruto
been a pet, and therefore property of a human being????Thoughts????
HOW CAN THE AI WORKS BE PROTECTED BY
COPYRIGHT, IF THEY SHOULD BE PROTECTED.
• D.
economics of ai works
• There are three possible parties which may have claims to the copyright of AI
generated works:
• AI programmers; owners (large companies and financial
• investors in the AI sector); and end users.
• When determining the best possible author, it is necessary to consider the overall
social benefit of the copyright attribution process.
• Professor Ryan Abbott is a proponent of legal rights for non-human authors and
inventors. He argues that assigning inventorship and authorship to non-humans is
an innovative new way to encourage AI growth and development.In theory, this
could prevent works independently created by AI machines from falling into the
public domain and offer the programmers and companies behind these machines
some exclusivity to the resulting copyrightable works.
Economics of AI Ctd
• Providing incentives to AI programmers and owners would be the logical
solution to ensuring sustainable growth
• and development of the AI sector. While independent programmers may
retain copyright for the work generated by their AI, copyright of AI works
created within large companies may be settled through employment
contrconts and attributed to either programmers or the companies for
which they work (based on the contractual agreement).
• Should owners and programmers choose to assign copyright to end users,
this may be done through End User Licensing Agreements (EULA). In the
long term, licensing may prove more financially viable for some companies,
while commercializing AI generated works may work best for others.
AI and work for hire
• The work made for hire structure allows corporations as non-human
entities to be an author of a creative work
• By reinterpreting the employee–employer relationship of the made for
hire doctrine a number of issues are avoided.
• Firstly, copyrights are attributed to a legal/natural person instead of a
non-human with no legal protection.
• Human programmers and companies who own AI machines are
considered natural and legal persons, respectively. As such, they are
fully responsible under the law and enjoy all privileges and liabilities
associated with it.
AI AND THE PRINCIPAL-AGENT
RELATIONSHIP
• . Can AI be Agents??
• Generally, only natural persons can be agents. Since AI lacks required
authorship for copyright protection, it is unlikely that AI can be
treated as agents for agent-principal purposes.
• However, many states have made exceptions for the natural person
requirement and allow corporations to serve as agents under certain
circumstances
AI and the”Joint Work” Doctrine
• While the idea of complete integration of artificial intelligence as an author of creative works
throughout current copyright law framework may be too forward-thinking, a more practical
approach can be addressed as a compromise between those that do not wish to stray from
the human interaction requirement and those that wish to see artificial intelligence as
authors.
• However, like the work made for hire doctrine’s limitation to an employment relationship,
joint works requires knowledge and intention of merging contributions into a unitary whole
• Artificial intelligence could be considered joint author because it can create independent
copyrightable subject matter that’s contributions be merged into an inseparable unitary
whole. Programmers would be able to create the already copyrightable algorithms that lay
out the parameters of the artificial intelligence with the intent that their works, such as the
data used to program the machine, would combine with the AI independently created work
into one work of authorship. This would then allow both the human programmer and the
artificial intelligence to have the exclusive rights granted to copyright owners
AI and legal personality through PLC
• interrogate the possibility of utilizing the corporate loophole.
