The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Copyright and Intellectual Property Laws: Challenges and Adaptations

The Author of this Blog Article is Mr. Nishchay Agarwal , a fourth year law student pursuing B.A.LL. B, from NLC BVDU.

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence's (hereinafter referred as AI) capacity to create, generate, and manipulate content disrupts traditional notions of authorship and ownership, prompting a re-evaluation of existing copyright laws. The fundamental

principles designed around human authorship struggle to grapple with the attribution and delineation of ownership rights for AI-generated works. This paradigm shift challenges the duration and extent of protection for such

creations within the existing legal framework. Furthermore, AI's prowess in data aggregation and processing challenges established concepts of originality and fair use. Determining the boundaries of infringement or transformative use

becomes intricate when AI-generated content mirrors existing copyrighted material, blurring the lines of legality. Adapting legal frameworks to accommodate these challenges is imperative to ensure equitable protection for creators and incentivize innovation. Redefining the concept of authorship, revisiting the criteria for copyright protection, and establishing specific frameworks for AI-generated content represent crucial steps in this adaptation process.

Moreover, the liability associated with AI-generated content and the ethical considerations surrounding its creation and use necessitate a delicate balance between technological advancement and the protection of IP rights. The

urgency lies in the comprehensive re-evaluation and potential recalibration of existing copyright and IP laws to navigate the intricate terrain shaped by AI. This abstract acts as a precursor to a deeper exploration of the challenges and

strategies required to harmonize the advancements in AI with the protection of intellectual property rights.

Introduction

The integration of AI in various creative processes, from generating art and music to aiding in content creation and analysis, has raised significant challenges for copyright and intellectual property (IP) laws. As AI becomes more capable of autonomously creating, distributing, and manipulating content, the traditional frameworks of copyright and IP laws face new and complex challenges. The core issue revolves around the attribution and ownership of AI- generated content. Determining the rightful owner of creations generated by AI algorithms is a complex conundrum. Should it be the creator of the AI, the user who initiates the AI's actions, or the AI itself? Existing copyright laws, which typically grant ownership to human creators, may struggle to encompass the nuances of AI-generated works.

Copyright and AI-Generated Content

Traditionally, copyright law has protected original works of authorship created by humans. However, AI-generated content often blurs the lines between human and machine authorship, making it difficult to determine who owns the copyright.

In the United States, the Copyright Office has stated that it will not register copyright for works created solely by AI. This is because the Copyright Act of 1976 defines AI "as a human being". The Copyright Office's position has been affirmed by federal courts. In 2023, a judge in the US District Court for the District of Columbia sided with the agency against computer scientist

Stephen Thaler, who was seeking copyright protection for an image created by AI software. However, the issue of copyright ownership and AI is not entirely settled. Some legal scholars argue that AI-generated content may be eligible for copyright protection if it meets the standards of originality and creativity. To further understand the concept of AI-generated content and its authorship, we have the below-stated case studies for art, music, and writings creates with

AI.

• AI-Generated Art
  

"The Next Rembrandt" In 2016, a team of researchers at the Dutch company ING created an AI algorithm that was able to produce paintings in the style of the Dutch Golden Age painter Rembrandt van Rijn. The algorithm was trained

on a dataset of over 350 of Rembrandt's paintings, and it was able to generate new paintings that were indistinguishable from the artist's own work. "Creative Applications of Neural Networks to Generate Images" In 2018, a

team of researchers at Google AI published a paper describing their work on using neural networks to generate images. The researchers developed a new algorithm called Pixel CNN, which was able to generate realistic images of objects and scenes.

• AI-Generated Music

Bach by Deep Learning: In 2016, a team of researchers at Google Brain created an AI algorithm that was able to compose music in the style of the German Baroque composer Johann Sebastian Bach. The algorithm was trained on a

dataset of over 200 of Bach's compositions, and it was able to generate new pieces of music that were stylistically consistent with Bach's work.

AI Duet: In 2019, a team of researchers at the UOW [1] created an AI algorithm that was able to perform a duet with a human musician. The algorithm was trained on a dataset of over 100,000 pieces of music, and it was able to generate new melodies that were harmonically and stylistically compatible with the human musician's playing.

• AI-Generated Writing

"The Creativity Machine" In 2016, a team of researchers at OpenAI created an AI algorithm that was able to generate human-quality text. The algorithm was trained on a dataset of over 8 million articles from the internet, and it was able

to generate new text that was grammatically correct, creative, and relevant to the topic at hand.

"Roko Basilisk's" In 2014, a user on the online forum Less Wrong posted a story about a fictional AI that was able to recursively improve its own intelligence. The story was widely discussed on the internet, and it raised concerns about the potential dangers of AI. Identifying copyright infringement in AI-generated content is a complex and challenging task due to the unique nature of AI-generated works and the evolving legal landscape surrounding intellectual property rights. However, there are several key considerations and approaches that can be employed to assess potential copyright infringement claims in this context.

1. Establishing Access and Substantial Similarity

2. Identifying Originality and Creativity

3. Determining Human Authorship

4. Considering Fair Use and Derivative Works Doctrines

5. Utilizing Technological Tools and Expert Assistance

Copyright Laws and AI in India

The Copyright Act of 1957 [2] in India was amended in 1994. This was done to include computer-generated works, such as literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic works. A specific provision, Section 2(d)(v) [3] , was introduced to define the authorship of such works as “the person who causes the work to be created.” The determination of AI authorship depends on how the term “person” is defined and interpreted in its context. In the case of Rupendra Kashyap v. Jiwan Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. [4] , it was said that

“Under the Indian copyright act, authorship can only be attributed to a natural person,”

and it was further carried out in the case of Tech Plus Media Private Ltd. v. Jyoti Janda [5] . In this case, the Court affirmed that authorship cannot be attributed to a juristic person, although it can be the copyright owner. In the case of Navigators Logistics Ltd. v. Kashif Qureshi's & Ors. [6] , the government of India recognized the importance of AI. The case centered on a copyright claim for a computer-generated list, which was dismissed by the Court due to the lack of human intervention. This aligns with the position in the United States, where authorship cannot be solely attributed to AI.

Challenges of Copyright Law in the Age of AI

The emerging era of AI is bringing new changes and challenges in the field of Copyright and IP Laws.[7] From the view of authorship to originality of the content, there are a number of challenges to applying copyright law to AI- generated content. These include:

1. Determining human authorship: It is often difficult to determine the extent to which a human has contributed to the creation of an AI-generated work. In some cases, the human may simply provide a prompt or input data, while in other cases the human may play a more active role in the creative process.

2. Addressing derivative works: AI algorithms are often trained on large datasets of copyrighted material. This raises questions about whether AI- generated works that are derivative of copyrighted works should be protected by copyright.

3. Defining originality and creativity: Copyright law protects original works of authorship. However, it can be difficult to define originality and creativity in the context of AI-generated content.

Possible Solutions

A number of possible solutions have been proposed to address the challenges of copyright law in the age of AI. These include:

1.Expanding the definition of "author" to include AI: This would allow AI- generated works to be copyrighted.

2. Creating a new category of copyright for AI-generated works: This would allow AI-generated works to be protected without requiring them to meet the same standards of originality and creativity as human-created works.

3. Establishing a system of joint authorship: This would allow both the human and the AI to be considered authors of an AI-generated work.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the rapid evolution of artificial intelligence poses unprecedented challenges to copyright and intellectual property laws. Balancing innovation and protection require adaptive legal frameworks. Policymakers must address issues like AI-generated content ownership and infringement, fostering a dynamic legal landscape that supports creativity while safeguarding the rights of creators and innovators. After the case of "Navigators Logistics Ltd. v. Kashif Qureshi & Ors." [8] Indian Government has taken steps such as the ‘AI for All’ policy and the AI Task Force to use AI for social and economic changes. Given the rapid advancement in AI technology, it becomes crucial to re-evaluate the intellectual property framework to ensure that the law keeps pace with these developments.

References:

1. University of Washington

2. Indian Copyright Act, 1957; later amended in 1994

3. Section 2(d) says author means,

(i) in relation to literary or dramatic work, the author of the work;

(ii) in relation to a musical work, the composer;

(iii) in relation to an artistic work other than a photograph, the artist;

(iv) in relation to a photograph, the person taking the photograph;

[(v) in relation to a cinematograph film or sound recording, the producer; and

(vi) in relation to any literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work which is computer-generated, the person who

causes the work to be created;]

4. Rupendra Kashyap v. Jiwan Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. 1996 Delhi HC

5. Tech Plus Media Private Ltd. v. Jyoti Janda, 2014 Delhi HC

6. Navigators Logistics Ltd. v. Kashif Qureshi & Ors, 2018 Delhi HC

7. Intellectual Property Laws

8. Navigators Logistics Ltd. v. Kashif Qureshi & Ors, 2018 Delhi HC