Abstract
On September 22, 2022, the UK government released “Examining patent applications relating to artificial intelligence (AI) inventions: The Guidance”, which clarified nine implementation guidelines. It specifically states that in the UK, AI inventions in all technical fields are patentable, and AI inventions are not excluded when the tasks or processes performed by AI inventions reveal a technical contribution to known technology and are patentable qualifications. However, does the existing copyright system provide sufficient protection for AI's creative innovations? Starting from the existing legal provisions, case law and doctrines, this paper analyzes the different attitudes of the EU, the US, Australia, the UK and China towards AI output works, and examines the inadequacy of the current copyright system in protecting AI's creative innovations by combining cases and survey reports. Based on the above analysis, at the end of the article, suggestions are made for the improvement of copyright law for AI protection, and conclusions are finally drawn.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
GOV.UK.: Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property: copyright and patents (2021a). [online] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/artificial-intelligence-and-ip-copyright-and-patents/artificial-intelligence-and-intellectual-property-copyright-and-patents. Accessed 6 Jan 2022
GOV.UK.: Government response to call for views on artificial intelligence and intellectual property (2021b). https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/artificial-intelligence-and-intellectual-property-call-for-views/government-response-to-call-for-views-on-artificial-intelligence-and-intellectual-property. Accessed 6 Jan 2022
Guadamuz, A.: Artificial intelligence and copyright. [online] Wipo.int (2017). https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2017/05/article_0003.html. Accessed 6 Jan 2022
Hugenholtz, P.B., Quintais, J.P.: Copyright and artificial creation: does EU copyright law protect AI-assisted output? IIC – Int. Rev. Intellect. Prop. Compet. Law (2021)
Williams, B.: Painting by numbers: copyright protection and AI-generated art. Eur. Intellect. Prop. Rev. (2021)
Balganesh, S.: Causing Copyright. Columbia Law Rev. (2017)
Acohs Pty Ltd v. Ucorp Pty Ltd [2012] FCAFC 16 (Aus)
Dorotheou, E.: Reap the benefits and avoid the legal uncertainty: who owns the creations of artificial intelligence? Comput. Telecommun. Law Rev. (2015)
Bonadio, E., McDonagh, L.: Artificial intelligence as producer and consumer of copyright works: evaluating the consequences of algorithmic creativity. Intellect. Prop. Q. (2020)
Dickenson, J., Morgan, A., Clark, B.: Creative machines: ownership of copyright in content created by artificial intelligence applications. Eur. Intellect. Prop. Rev. (2017)
Shenzhen Tencent Computer System Co Ltd., v Shanghai Yingxun Technology Co Ltd. Yue 0305 Min Chu No. 14010 (Nanshan District Court of Shenzhen) (Tencent) (2019)
Zhang, W.: The first case in the field of AI writing was decided, the court confirmed for the first time that work generated by AI was original and protected by the copyright law. Legal Daily 8 (Bei**g, 8 January 2020)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Cui, J. (2022). Copyright and AI: Are Extant Laws Adequate?. In: Hu, B., **a, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, LJ. (eds) Big Data – BigData 2022. BigData 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13730. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23501-6_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23501-6_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-23500-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-23501-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)