AI owning Art?

Artificial Intelligence has been taking over the world. This new type of technology has created a deep shock in the general culture of the entire world. One of the important points that has been debated is the ownership of this type of work. Who created the work? As I mentioned in my previous article, copyright law protects humanity's creativity by giving them ownership over the work they create.

With this new technology, where a third party is given prompts that create a “creative work,” a question must be asked – who made the art? Was it the person who inputted the commands for the released image? Or was it the people who created and programmed the Artificial Intelligence of the owners? Can the Artificial Intelligence in itself be the owner of the work? These questions created by this new type of technology still need to be answered through a new regulation.

Recent history has shown the lengths to which this type of technology has tried to push the boundaries of copyright law. In the US, Kris Kashtanova attempted to get the comic book Zarya of the Dawn protected by the US Copyright Office. She wrote the story and asked Midjourney, an artificial intelligence, to draw the image. The US Copyright Office defended only the story and not the images because there was no “human authorship” in the images (https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/02/us-copyright-office-withdraws-copyright-for-ai-generated-comic-artwork/). In Germany, a photographer, Boris Eldagsen, refused a prestigious award for winning the Sony World Photography Awards with a picture that he “cheekily” created using Artificial Intelligence (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/apr/17/photographer-admits-prize-winning-image-was-ai-generated). In The Netherlands, “The Next Rembrandt” was commissioned by ING Groep NV and created by Artificial Intelligence based on the styling and work of the 1600 artist, using data and facial recognition of 346 of his paintings (https://www.ing.com/Newsroom/News/Rembrandt-goes-digital-.htm). 

There needs to be more clarity in the legislation about the authorship of these types of works. The European regulation has established that any generative AI system must publicly disclose a detailed summary of the works used to train the AI. In the US, the Copyright Office has issued a Notice of Inquiry to determine the need for regulation or legislation.

We are at an unprecedented moment as this new technology has come to disrupt the status quo of creative works. The effects of whatever legislation is enacted will have both supporters and detractors, so it is essential to try and understand the reaches of all to see who really will be considered the “author” of an AI-created work.

José Portabella, Abogado, BridgehouseLaw Charlotte

Image: iStock