| Pub. Date | : Jan, 2021 |
|---|---|
| Product Name | : The IUP Journal of Law Review |
| Product Type | : Article |
| Product Code | : IJLR30121 |
| Author Name | :S Suganya and E Prema |
| Availability | : YES |
| Subject/Domain | : Arts & Humanities |
| Download Format | : PDF Format |
| No. of Pages | : 10 |
Work created by Artificial Intelligence (AI) is indistinguishable from work made by human beings. However, current copyright law does not take the works by non-humans into account. So far, the copyright law has not provided any clear answer or even guidelines as to who should be deemed as the author and owner of works generated by AI. This situation is dangerous for the AI industry. Due to lack of legal certainty, companies and natural persons can be demotivated and stop investing monetary and creative efforts in the development of AI systems. This, in turn, could disrupt the progress in the area of AI's application. This paper discusses whether automatically created work can be protected by copyright and also discusses ownership in different scenarios. It argues that giving authorship to AI is essential for future advancement of the intellectual property industry. This can in many ways affect the application of intellectual property and copyright law.
Traditionally, we are aware that copyright protection is available to the works done by human beings. Copyright law is a unique kind of intellectual property, it is an exclusive right conferred to protect the fruit of the laborer. Copyright is an intangible incorporeal right granted to the author or originator of a certain literary or artistic work by which he is invested with the sole author for a specified period. As the technological advancement had its drastic growth, newer issues started to rise in copyright law. One such issue was the recognition of the computer-generated works whether such works are entitled to copyright protection. But the principle of copyright protection was disrupted when the monkey 'selfie' case emerged in 2015, i.e., copyright over the 'selfie' taken by the monkey on the camera of the photographer. Eventually, this issue was resolved outside the court, but it brought up philosophical question of the copyright holder and challenged the fundamental principle that only human-created works can