COPYRIGHT IN THE SPECTRUM OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

30th December, 2024 - 7:39 am Categories: AI Copyright 0 Comments

INTRODUCTION

With the rise in technology and media, the copyright laws have also emerged exponentially. The Copyright Act, 1957, has undergone a few crucial amendments to meet the current technological advancements. Nonetheless, certain areas, like the works generated by Artificial Intelligence (hereinafter referred to as “AI”) are required to be dealt with by the lawmakers. Now, AI has reached almost everywhere, be it movie making, novel writing, teaching, painting, singing and whatnot. Many AI tools, like the Scriptbook, assist in analyzing scripts, plot development and box office success.[i] For instance, an AI named Benjamin created a screenplay after being fed with dozens of science fiction movie scripts.[ii] This work can be considered original; however, it does not surpass the test of “creativity”. Therefore, the question arises as to whether these works should be given the protection of copyright laws. The works generated by a computer or a machine do not come under the modicum of creativity as it generates work on the basis of set of commands and algorithms, but the same cannot be said about AI as it is a deep-learning language that is built to learn and act in the most humanly way possible.

Even though many jurors and scientists argue on whether AI can be innovative as per human caliber, the view of the majority is that it can be coached to create independent works. This blog delves into the intricacies of the AI-generated work and copyright laws.

WHAT IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI)?

John McCarthy was the one who coined the term “Artificial Intelligence” in the year 1955.[iii] He defines AI as “the science and engineering of making intelligent machines.”[iv] AI is human-centered as it casts around for the analytical, logical and social abilities of human beings.[v] The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) acknowledges the existence of AI and categorizes them into three, namely, perception systems, natural language systems and expert systems.[vi]

AI AND COPYRIGHT

Copyright is the legal right to control the use of an original piece of creation such as a movie, book, music, photograph, etc.[vii] The creator becomes the first owner of the original work they created. In India, Section 17 of the Copyright Act, 1957 states that the dramatic works, artistic works, musical works, literary works, cinematographic films and sound recordings are conferred with the copyrights protection.[viii] Minimum modicum of originality was upheld in the case of Eastern Book Co. v. D.B. Modak.[ix] The conflict between mechanical labor and creativity was explained by the US Court in Burrow-Gilles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony[x] as purely mechanical labor is not original, therefore narrowing the scope of their protection, thereby creating a problem for copyright protection of  the AI-generated content.

There are also other cases where the criteria for creativity have been lowered, like the judgement of Alfred Bell & Co. Ltd. v. Catalda Fine Arts Inc. that an original work is not copied from any other artistic work of similar nature.[xi] If this criterion is to be applied, then the AI-generated works are original. Section 2(ffc) of the Act[xii] provides protection to the machine- readable medium.

COPYRIGHT LAWS RELATED TO AI GENERATED WORKS IN INTERNATIONAL DIASPORA.

The US Copyright Act of 1976[xiii] states that copyright protection will be given to the works created by the “author,” and this term has been defined in various case laws, like Naruto v. Slater,[xiv] defining it as a human being and that the creation by him/her should be from their own intellect. Australia follows the same. Germany also doesn’t provide copyright protection to the AI-generated content. The legislation of India and the UK provides an amicable solution to this problem. Section 9(3) of the CDPA[xv] states that in the case of a literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic work that is computer-generated, the author will be the person who has created the work. The Indian Copyright Act states that in the case of computer-generated work, the person creating the work is the author.[xvi]

THE REAL OWNER OF THE AI-GENERATED WORK

The question is who is supposed to be the real owner of the AI-generated work under the copyright laws: – the AI developer, the end-user of that AI or the artists from whom such AI creation is inspired. Well, for that, we need to delve into Section 2(d)(vi) in the Copyright Act, as there is no caselaw in particular to deal with this issue as AI is an evolving and peculiar concept in the law-making regime. The section states that when it comes to literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work that is computer-generated, “the person who causes the work to be created” would be considered as its “author.” The first ambiguity lies in deciding as to who will be regarded as “the person who causes the work to be created.” This depends upon the proximity of the person to the created work, i.e., who is directly involved with creation. The person contributing the most is supposed to be the owner of the work. Therefore, we can interpret that the individual who contributes the most to the development and research of a specific AI is the one who has made the necessary arrangements to create that particular AI. The second ambiguity pertains to the rights of reproduction and distribution. The right to distribution exhausts after the first sale, but the right to reproduction still exists. The ownership should not be given to the developer who was under commission to develop the AI, as the money and risk were taken by another person (whether natural or legal), and he/she should be assigned the ownership. The artists who have inspired the AI-generated work should also not be given the ownership, as ownership depends on expression and not on the ideas that inspire the work.

CONCLUSION

With the advancement of innovation through AI, the lawmakers should contribute to establishing a framework where the AI and copyright laws get to intersect with each other and evolve in tandem with the technological landscape. The AI-generated works require copyright protection. These works satisfy the originality standard of the copyright criteria. In India, there is no requirement for a natural person to be an author, so AI can also be an author. The rise of machines is prevalent, and they come here as creators and not as conquerors.[xvii] Therefore, the path for copyright protection of the AI-generated work is a clear possibility.

Author: AYUSHI SINGH, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.

[i] Neil Sahota, The AI Takeover In Cinema: How Movie Studios Use Artificial Intelligence, Forbes (last visited Jul. 23, 2024, 10:00 PM), https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilsahota/2024/03/08/the-ai-takeover-in-cinema-how-movie-studios-use-artificial-intelligence/.

[ii] Hal 90210, This is what happens when an AI-written screenplay is made into a film, The Guardian (last visited Jul. 23, 2024, 10:30 PM), https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/10/artificial-intelligence-screenplay-sunspring-silicon-valley-thomas-middleditch-ai.

[iii] Prof. A. Lakshminath & Dr. Mukund Sarda, Digital Revolution and Artificial Intelligence: Challenges to Legal Education and Legal Research, CNLU LJ (2) (2011-2012).

[iv] Rockwell Anyoha, The History of Artificial Intelligence, Science in the News (last visited Jul. 23 , 2024, 9:29 PM), https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/history-artificial-intelligence/.

[v] Professor Christopher Manning, Artificial Intelligence Definitions, Stanford University Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (last visited Jul. 23, 2024, 9:45 PM)  https://hai.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/2020-09/AI-Definitions-HAI.pdf.

[vi] A. Johnson-Laird, Neural Networks: The Next Intellectual Property Nightmare? The Computer Lawyer.

[vii] Cambridge Dictionary, https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/copyright (last visited Jul. 23, 2024, 8:00 PM).

[viii] Copyright Act, 1957, § 17.

[ix] Eastern Book Co. v. D.B. Modak, (2008) 1 SCC 1.

[x] Burrow-Gilles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 1884 SCC OnLine US SC 113 : 28 Led 349 : 111 US 53 (1884).

[xi] Alfred Bell & Co. Ltd. V. Catalda Fine Arts Inc., 191 F 2d 99 (2^nd Cir 1951).

[xii] Copyright Act, 1957, § 2 (ffc).

[xiii] The US Copyright Act of 1976, 17 US § 102.

[xiv] Naruto v. Slater, 888 F.3d 418 (9 th Cir. 2018).

[xv] The UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, § 9(3)

[xvi] Copyright Act 1957, § 2(d)(vi)

[xvii] Andrez Guadamuz, Artificial Intelligence and Copyright, WIPO Magazine, (last visited Jul. 23, 2024, 9:29 PM), https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2017/05/article_0003.html.

Tags: Artificial Intelligence, Copyright laws, Innovation, Originality, India, USA, UK