By: K. Sai Spoorthi, Department of computer science and engineering, Student of computer science and engineering, Madanapalle Institute of Technology and Science, 517325, Angallu, Andhra Pradesh.
Abstract
In general, the phenomena associated with generative AI are still rather emerging and open up a number of issues and possibilities in such a field as IP. The challenges that are expected to be experienced in relation to authorship, ownership, and copyrights due to advancement in technology especially the use of AI in creation of content are why new laws must be put in place. For when Artificial Intelligence technologies are used to cause more and more of the creative processes to be more and more automated, the meanings of originality, creativity, and ownership alter. Based on the results, possibilities and threats are considered to creative enterprises up to such risks as neglecting human factor and problematic status of the current Copyright legislation. Ethical issues are also discussed and the rights to the ownership of the content generated by AI and prejudice in it. [1]Based on the above reasons, this paper supports a pluralist view of law and calls for an interdisciplinary as well as an open development of various legal frameworks to enable the utilisation of generative AI with the overarching intention of supporting innovation and IPR protection.
Key words: Generative Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, Ethics in AI, Legal Framework, Copyright, Authorship
Introduction
The advancements of late in the creation of AI technologies have introduced new opportunities and risks in the latter fields and, more particularly, in the arena of IP. And when creativity and innovation get equated or if AI systems are involved then such legal concepts of IP protection exist. The peculiarities of the generative AI described above make up the question of ownership and authorship of AI-produced content an especially sensitive problem because in the case of this approach the main processes are largely handled by algorithms and datasets. Consequently, this essay will also try to analyse those complexities beginning from the impacts that generative AI creates on the IP rights, from the analysis of the present legal framework, up to the presentation of the progressive actions that should be taken in order to adapt to this revolutionary technology. In conclusion, the knowledge of these dynamics is helpful to the stakeholders because they have to handle complex dynamics of intellectual property due to the current improvement in technology. Engaging such matter will make a researcher, a creator and a policy maker in a position to solve any clash that may occur in future.
Generative AI and its impact on creative industries
Because of generative AI, a significant portion of creative industries can be to a greater or lesser extent automated and thereby pose threats to authorship and creativity paradigms. The concept of using generative AI is effective because it can develop new pieces of music, art and writing; however, the output is the imitation of established some human style, thus, raising significant questions about originality and human input. It extends creative tools to every citizen and small business, making it possible to produce more and more content and making it easier to devalue human creativity. Besides, these innovations made various industries reconsider the existing IPRs as, for example, creators of content which are generated by AI do not belong to any of the conventional categories. Therefore, the use of generative AI is not confined to creation alone, which thus calls for new definition of precedents in what used to be a creative legal realm.
Intellectual Property Rights in the Age of Generative AI
Therefore, the subject of learnable generative AI comes with a lot of risks for any existing paradigms of intellectual property rights implying the need to reconsider how such laws develop in relation to new technologies. The more we produce text with the help of AI, the more meaningless the ideas of authorship and ownership, as well as the idea of copyright protection in general. As the activists of the socioeconomic change observe in the contextual literature, tangible assets have been replaced with the intangible ones, which in turn intends to create new challenges for the legal regulation of creators’ rights while promoting innovations. Moreover, the advent of generative AI results to new and emerging discourses in the patent law especially on software development since an algorithm can give out outputs that could be beyond the legal debate over the innovation law. While handling such issues inside the domain of IP, one has to pay much attention to the fact that legislators and all the other interested parties have to introduce the elastic legal norms and regulation that would adequately protect the generators and, at the same time, foster perovation of generative AI apps.
The complexities of copyright law as it pertains to AI-generated content
Engaging in the interpretation of the provisions of the copyright law in terms of the content created by AI raises numerous issues that modern legislation fail to address conclusively. This is an issue of authorship as AI technology develops: if judged by the concept that originals retain copyright, then they will not. Modern legal rules usually tend to address human authorship as a precondition for the works’ protection by copyright law, and, thus, AI works are in the rather ambiguous sphere where their status is still unknown. where the legal framework fails to provide legal basis for the rights of creators of AI there is a chance that written by machine content may be considered as belonging to the public domain while AI based on existing copyrighted material may cause controversies over ownership of rights to their content. It entails certain dangers for the creators and producers, who can violate existing copyrights without knowing it, or, on the other hand, can be accused of unlawful violations even if it is not the case. [2]These issues have to be tackled if there is to be a clear and well-coordinated approach to formulating the new theories of copyright law which must provide for the protection of AI works while respecting to existing copyright laws.
Ethical Considerations and Ownership Issues
At this point what is important to understand is that the impact of generative AI for concerns of ethical issues and ownership identification is not strictly with the purview of conventional IP systems. Taking into account such recent stimulating improvements in the sphere of AI technologies, existing legislation pertains to it sometimes has difficulties with aiming at the rate of change and hence these rather complex questions of ownership connected to notions like authorship and copyright. [3]For instance, when an AI system generates a piece of art or literature, questions arise about the rightful owner of the content: It can mean the person who initially set the parameters of the algorithm; the person that feeds parameter values into the algorithm; or the AI system that adjusts the parameters to derive the answer [4]. This brings in not only legal questions but also ethical questions about who is responsible for what and who is the author of the product especially when human end user creativity is in part included in what is being produced by the AI. Moreover, as shown in fig1, there is such thing as ethical standards of training datasets, which are also rather vague due to misappropriation and decrease of the inherent, though often unintentional, bias; this brings up the relatively topics of rough Fairness, equity, moral imperatives of the developers and users. That is why there is a need to give a structural answer to these challenges which force legal scholars, technologists, and ethicists to redesign Owensville for the age of AI.
The debate over authorship and ownership of AI-generated works
Issues of copyright and authorship of the creations that involve the use of AI have become more questioned in recent years raising pertinent questions to current paradigms on IP protection. It has been asked, whether the mind creators of such AI systems should enjoy the copyrights to the works generated by these systems or that the AI generated works should be in the public domain, as they are produced by non-human intellect Advocates for ownership of AI propose that the developers program its algorithms therefore they are warranted ownership of the outcomes. On the other hand, there are people who believe that associating authorship with non-organic beings erases the point of creativity and artistry, which, by definition and historical precedent, involve purpose and empathy. While legal systems try to address those questions, more precise definitions will prove indispensable for promoting advanced inventions and encouraging human authors at the same time as for preventing the distortion of the protective principles of Intellectual Property Rights .[5]
Conclusion :
Since the field of Generative AI is still developing, it has profound consequences to the area of intellectual property, especially in educational and technological settings. As illustrated, the incorporation of Generative AI models in fields like nursing; education brings into focus the opportunity aspects like cost effectivity and availability while bringing out the significant issues like legal concerns to do with the ownership and copyright of the created content .Likewise, the technological development of AI applications in electric vehicles point to a con in that a clear conception of an ethical standard, with regards to data privacy and rights to one’s invention. These issues must be solved to maximize the innovation but at the same time to ensure that the innovators and consumers are safe. This achievement can be attained with the help of multidisciplinary work and implementation of solid judiciary dispensation to utilize Generative AI to the full extent thus opening the possibilities to incorporate it into various fields safely and positively impacting the balance between innovation and maintaining IP’s integrity. Finally, the policy and regulation in the field of Generative AI depend on the input that will encourage design and innovation with proper rights distribution for everyone, the fact that will lead to the mutual integration of technology and art.
References
- S. Chesterman, “Good models borrow, great models steal: intellectual property rights and generative AI,” Policy Soc., p. puae006, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1093/polsoc/puae006.
- L. Triyono, R. Gernowo, P. Prayitno, M. Rahaman, and T. R. Yudantoro, “Fake News Detection in Indonesian Popular News Portal Using Machine Learning For Visual Impairment,” JOIV Int. J. Inform. Vis., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 726–732, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.30630/joiv.7.3.1243.
- M. Rahaman, C.-Y. Lin, and M. Moslehpour, “SAPD: Secure Authentication Protocol Development for Smart Healthcare Management Using IoT,” Oct. 2023, pp. 1014–1018. doi: 10.1109/GCCE59613.2023.10315475.
- J. Smits and T. Borghuis, “Generative AI and Intellectual Property Rights,” in Law and Artificial Intelligence: Regulating AI and Applying AI in Legal Practice, B. Custers and E. Fosch-Villaronga, Eds., The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press, 2022, pp. 323–344. doi: 10.1007/978-94-6265-523-2_17.
- R. M. Dhingra and N. D. Dewani, Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Law in India. Taylor & Francis, 2024.
- Li, K. C., Gupta, B. B., & Agrawal, D. P. (Eds.). (2020). Recent advances in security, privacy, and trust for internet of things (IoT) and cyber-physical systems (CPS).
- Chaudhary, P., Gupta, B. B., Choi, C., & Chui, K. T. (2020). Xsspro: Xss attack detection proxy to defend social networking platforms. In Computational Data and Social Networks: 9th International Conference, CSoNet 2020, Dallas, TX, USA, December 11–13, 2020, Proceedings 9 (pp. 411-422). Springer International Publishing.
Cite As
Spoorthi K.S. (2024) Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges with Generative AI, Insights2Techinfo, pp.1