AI and Copyright: The Legal Revolution under

With the rise of AI, capable of creating lyrics, music or even works of art, copyright is tested more than ever. These new technologies, which move the limits of creation, question the concepts of originality and protection of works.

The emergence of AI in the world of creation arouses legitimate concerns between human artists and authors. The risk that their works are imitated, reproduced, or outdated IA Creations, threatened the value of their work and could even slow down human artistic creation. In parallel, the databases on which AI are based often contain protected works, raise ethical and legal issues about the authors’ right to control the use of their work as raw materials for inhumane arts. This debate emphasizes the need for a clear framework that requires, for example, transparency and consent to the use of these works in AI systems.

Copyright is a set of rights granted to the creators of the original works of mind. It applies to literary, artistic, music, audiovisual, photographic works and software. Copyright gives the author exclusive privileges on the use of his work, in particular the right to reproduce, distribute, publicly represent and modify his work.

Work generated by AI: Who is the author?

One of the main questions that arise when we talk about artificial intelligence and copyright is to know who can be considered the author of a work created by one AI.

The article L111-1 of the intellectual property code is provided in particular by the fact that the author of the spirit of spirit has this work by the mere fact of creating exclusive intangible property and is against everyone. This right includes intellectual and moral attributes as well as the attributes of inheritance, which are determined by the books I and III of this code.

Take, for example, an AI that creates a picture or composes music. The law traditionally recognizes individuals as the author of the work. But in the case of a work generated by AI, where is paternity?

At present, the law does not recognize the possibility that artificial intelligence itself can require copyright rights because it requires human intervention and realizes the right to request this right. The work generated independently of AI cannot therefore be protected by copyright if no person can be identified as an author.

The absence of recognition of clearly identifiable author complicates the application of copyright to the works generated by AI. Indeed, the law is based on evidence that the work reflects the OTIS personality of its creator. For works created by AI, this is a question of demonstration that the challenges used testify to this personal imprint. If this evidence is not proven, work cannot benefit from copyright protection. The real problem is to massify the generated content and the use of existing works to cause AI, causing counterfeiting problems.

IA training and mental property: a complex relationship

Training is an automatic learning process by which an algorithm or AI model improves their performance on a given task by data analysis.

In order to create works, it must be created from a large amount of data, often from copyright works. Models, such as those that use writing or generating images, must receive huge volumes of information, often including literary works, music or paintings.

The authors of these original works are generally not consulted and even less reward for this use of their work. This raises the key question: Is it legal to use protected works without the recipient permission to cause AI? In the law, this maneuver represents counterfeiting pursuant to Article L335-2 of the intellectual property and legal management has already been filed against companies using AI models without respecting the rights of the creators.

In the United States, collective appeals are underway to determine whether the unauthorized use of work for AI training is a violation of copyright. For example, in 2023 a group of artists launched legal steps against Stability ai,, MidjourneyAND DevantartBy saying that their works were used without permission to train generative models AI.

Originality, creativity and ai

In order to be protected by copyright, it must be original, that is, it must reflect the personality and creativity of its author. But when the work is generated by AI, how to assess this “originality”?

Can the work created by the algorithm be considered to be sufficiently original to be protected?

This debate is essential for artists, writers and creators in general. Some lawyers claim that works created by AI cannot be protected because they do not reflect ” human creativity“Others believe that if a person using AI plays an important role in the process, some protection should be applied. This aspect creates a connection with what has been mentioned above.

By decision of October 11, 2023, the Prague Municipal Court spoke about the possibility of copyright protection to the content generated by the AI ​​system. The court concluded that an image created by artificial intelligence does not represent the work of the mind and therefore cannot request protection by copyright.

Reform tracks: for new regulations?

Given the challenges that are artificial intelligence, there are proposals to adapt the legal framework of the new reality. Some provisions seem to be possible:

Creating a particular state for works generated by AI

The idea would be to create a category of specific protection that would not be exactly similar to traditional copyrights. This could allow the framework for works created by algorithms and at the same time specify who belongs to this right.

License mechanisms for IA training

In order to respond to the concerns of the creators whose works are used for AI training, the establishment of a license system can be planned. The creators could be paid when their works are used to cause AI models to ensure a form of compensation.

Sharing generated income

Access to share revenue could be set for works generated by commercial purpose. In this model, the reception of creations generated by AI would be divided between AI developers, users and potentially creators of works that contributed to the model training. For example, if the AI ​​generates a commercial work derived from pictures, texts or protected sounds, income could include a royal reward for holders of origin.

Some countries reflect or have already taken measures. The aim of the Artificial Intelligence Regulation or the AI ​​Act is to oversee these questions in Europe, while in the United States, the Copyright Act on the Calls of Work created by AI takes into account.

Specifically Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 about artificial intelligencePublished in the official journal of the European Union 12 July 2024, is the main step in sight of artificial intelligence systems in Europe. This text sets out harmonized rules on AI technology regulation in the European Union. Its provision will enter into force from August 2025.

The developers of these systems must provide detailed technical documentation. This documentation will include accurate information about the operation of models, data used for their training and the methods used. This ensures strict traceability and better understanding of the functioning of these technologies.

In addition, transparent obligations will be imposed. General AI systems must clearly inform users that the content they produce has been created by artificial intelligence. The aim of this measure is to prevent any confusion with human creations and thus ensure the ethical use of these tools.

Finally, the rules of compliance with copyright are strengthened. The data used for the cause of AI models must strictly respect European legislation in this area. Developers will have to ensure that their procedures do not break the rights of the original creators, in particular by avoiding the use of protected work without permission. This framework seeks to prevent counterfeiting problems and at the same time protect the interests of authors due to the development of AI technology.

Conclusion

The penetration between artificial intelligence and copyright is still largely an unexplored field full of problems, but also opportunities. Meanwhile, traditional copyright laws are trying to keep up with a frantic pace of technological progress.

The balance to be found between the innovation and the protection of the creators is delicate. On the one hand, it is necessary to support the development of technologies that promise to open new borders. On the other hand, the protection of the rights of the creators is essential to guarantee only the remuneration and encouragement of artistic creation.

Finally, the development of the legal framework seems to be inevitable to allow harmonious coexistence between AI and human creators, and that creativity, whether human or assisted machines, continues to be appreciated and protected.

Editorial staff C.

The Cirtribnian editorial team connects its votes to express themselves on topics specific to cryptocurrencies, investments, metavers and NFT, trying to best answer your questions.