Impact of Artificial Intelligence on the Criteria of Originality in Copyright Law
Abstract
With recent technological advances in the field of artificial intelligence, new questions arise regarding the determination of copyright in works created using artificial intelligence technologies. This article examines the criterion of originality of a work in the legal systems of different countries and its importance for providing legal protection by copyright law to objects created with the use of artificial intelligence. Originality acts as a subjective criterion for determining the possibility of legal protection of a work as an object of copyright. Attention is focused on the lack of a single approach to establishing the originality of the work in the characterized countries. In particular, in the EU, the originality of a work is reduced to the personal creation of the author, in the USA — to the minimal creative contribution of the person-author, in United Kingdom — to its creation by the work and skills of a person, his or her efforts, in Ukraine — it is reduced to the criterion by which the work is characterized, which is the result of the author’s own intellectual creative activity, as well as a reflection of his or her creative decisions made during the creation of such a work. It is noted that all countries at the current stage are focusing their attention on the development of new legislation in the field of copyright regulation of objects created using artificial technologies, which is due to the desire for innovation and the introduction of modern digital technologies and artificial intelligence. That is why in the law-making process it is important to ensure that legal norms are flexible and correspond to changes in the technological environment, allowing to promote innovation and cultural development. Overall, it makes a valuable contribution to understanding the contemporary challenges of changing technologies and the impact of artificial intelligence on copyright law. It emphasizes the need for a balance between protecting the rights of creators and ensuring access to new technologies and innovations for the general benefit of society. Legal challenges related to determining authorship of works generated by artificial intelligence are discussed. The importance of further scientific research in this area is noted.
References
Голова НААУ, РАУ створила Робочу групу з правового регулювання штучного інтелекту та рекомендацій до законодавства (08.03.2023; 13:56). Національна асоціації адвокатів України. URL: https://bit.ly/488RXs7.
Дорошенко О., Тарасенко Л. Право sui generis на неоригінальні об’єкти, згенеровані комп’ютерною програмою: новели правового регулювання. Теорія і практика інтелектуальної власності. 2023. № 3. С. 87–96.
Майданик Л. Поняття оригінальності твору в авторському праві: досвід ЄС, України та інших зарубіжних країн. Підприємництво, господарство і право. 2018. № 10. С. 32–36.
Council Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs (OJ. L 122, 17.5.1991, рр. 42–46). EUR-Lex. URL: https://bit.ly/45IaREn.
Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs (OJ. L 111, 5.5.2009, рр. 16–22. EUR-Lex. URL: https://bit.ly/3sJHW4f.
Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases (OJ. L 77, 27.3.1996, pp. 20–28). EUR-Lex. URL: https://bit.ly/486LHRn.
Directive 2006/116/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights (codified version) (OJ. L 372, 27.12.2006, рр. 12–18.1). EUR-Lex. URL: https://bit.ly/486NpCn.
Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC (OJ. L 130, 17.5.2019, pp. 92–125). EUR-Lex. URL: https://bit.ly/45YTtem.
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 July 2009 № C-5/08. European Court Reports, 2009. EUR-Lex. URL: https://bit.ly/3sMQsj6.
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 1 December 2011. Eva-Maria Painer v Standard Verlags GmbH and Others. Case C-145/10. EUR-Lex. URL: https://bit.ly/3rd4c62.
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Yahoo! UK Ltd and Others of 1 March 2012 № C-604/10. CURIA — Court of Justice of the European Union. URL: https://bit.ly/3Ps1280.
Report on intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies of 02.10.2020 № 2020/2015(INI). European Parliament. URL: https://bit.ly/3EtZIep.
European Parliament resolution of 20 October 2020 on intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies (2020/2015(INI)). European Parliament. URL: https://bit.ly/3PbqwoE.
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Laying down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial intelligence Act) and Amending Certain Union Legislative Acts. Brussels, 21.4.2021. 2021/0106(COD). EUR-Lex. URL: URL: https://bit.ly/3P9m0qX.
Compendium of U.S. Copyright office practices (U.S. Coright office. 2021. Vol. 101. P. 1–1301. U.S. Copyright Office. URL: https://bit.ly/3r5OZDY.
The Copyright Act of 1976 (as amended and codified) (Public Law Number, 1976. Рр. 94–553). IP Mall. URL: https://bit.ly/3sKegnC.
Stephen Thaler, v. Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office, et al, Civil Action No. 22-1564 (BAH) (18.08.2023). U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. URL: https://bit.ly/4837rh8.
Andersen v. Stability AI Ltd. (3:23-cv-00201). District Court, N.D. California (13.01.2023). Free Law Project. URL: https://bit.ly/3PtCs6F.
Zhuk A. Navigating the legal landscape of AI copyright: a comparative analysis of EU, US, and Chinese approaches. AI and Ethics. 2023. Pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-023-00299-0.
Hayward A., Vandervliet A., Turner B. The IP in AI: Does Copyright Protect Ai-Generated Works? Legal Briefings (16.05.2023). Herbert Smith Freehills. URL: https://bit.ly/3r1n2ND.
Daniel C., Grasser J., Collis J. Copyright protection for AI works: UK vs US (12.07.2023). URL: https://bit.ly/3LeJ3PR.
Ihalainen J. Computer creativity: artificial intelligence and copyright. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice. 2018. № 13 (9). Рр. 724–728. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpy031.
Про авторське право і суміжні права. Закон України від 01.12.2022 р. № 2811–IX. Відомості Верховної Ради України. Законодавство України. URL: https://bit.ly/3sPUved.
