With the popularity of ChatGPT, the content generated by AIGC (Artificial Intelligence Generated Content) is more and more used by the public. However, there is a problem that has been bothering everyone, including the cowboy. That is: Is the content produced by AIGC copyrightable? Who does the copyright belong to?
01 What is AIGC
AIGC refers to artificial intelligence generated content, also known as generative AI. It uses artificial intelligence technology to automatically extract information from a large amount of text, image, voice and other data through natural language processing, machine learning, deep learning and other technical means to generate various types of content, including text, image, audio, video etc. AIGC can be applied to text generation, image generation, audio generation, video generation and other fields, such as news reporting, text creation, picture generation, speech synthesis, video generation, etc.
Failed to transfer,
upload again,
cancel
02 What does AI think
I asked about several AI products on the Internet, and the answers given were not the same.
1. Wenxing Yiyan: The developer of the AI tool that generates the content
The copyright of content such as articles, pictures, and images generated by AI tools belongs to the developer of the AI tools that generated the content. When using AI tools, users need to abide by relevant laws and regulations, respect intellectual property rights and the labor achievements of creators, and must not maliciously use the content generated by AI tools.
03 ChatGPT mirror
Since I can't go to ChatGPT, I found a few mirrors in China, and it's okay to answer other questions. Let's take a look at answering this question
Viewpoint 1: Belonging to the creator, that is, the user himself
The copyright of pictures, articles and other works generated by using AI tools belongs to the creator, that is, the user himself. Because AI tools only provide the technical means to create works, and users need to decide on the specific content and form of expression. If the work involves commercial use or the interests of others, it is also necessary to comply with relevant laws and regulations and apply for and obtain the corresponding authorization or license. In addition, it is recommended that users should confirm the terms of use, privacy policy, copyright statement and other relevant information of the tool when using AI tools to generate works, so as to understand their rights and obligations.
Point 2: Belonging to the developers of the AI tools that generated these works
The copyright of pictures, articles and other works generated by using AI tools belongs to the artificial intelligence tool developers who generated these works. However, any use of these works may require a license or payment. The specific situation needs to be judged according to the use agreement of the generation tool and relevant laws and regulations.
The above two both claim to be ChatGPT3.5, but the answers given are quite different.
04 CSDN's C knows
C knows is a generative AI product "ChitGPT (formerly known as "C knows") jointly developed by CSDN and external partners. I am a large language model (LLM) trained by the GPT (Generative Pre-Training) model, specially for The generative AI products designed by developers can help you solve various computer and development-related problems encountered in your study and work, such as code generation (write a bubble sort in js), code error tracking, code explanation, Code language conversion, content creation, etc., and provide continuously updated Prompt suggestions to help you quickly ask questions and find answers. Powered by GPT3.5
This is an introduction to C. Not many people use it, but the actual effect is not bad. His point of view is to analyze specific problems.
C knows the point of view: it depends on the specific situation, and the specific situation is analyzed in detail.
The copyright ownership of works such as pictures and articles generated by using AI tools depends on the specific circumstances. Generally speaking, if the works are all automatically generated by AI tools, the copyright may be owned by the developer or owner of the AI tools. Including human creative contributions, such as human editing and creativity of works, copyright may also involve human rights. The specific situation needs to be analyzed according to the specific content and generation method of the work.
Looking forward to getting more answers, such as Tongyi Qianwen/NEWbing..., welcome to send me a private message.
04 Discussion among legal professionals
Note: I have no legal knowledge, and the following content is compiled from the Internet.
The issue of AIGC copyright is not new today, but has been discussed all the time. The focus of the discussion is: whether non-human subjects can own copyright. In the famous case of monkeys taking photos, people are concerned about whether monkeys can enjoy copyright in taking photos. In the early days of the copyright issue of works generated by computer programs, the academic circles were also discussing the legal attributes of such creations.
On February 21, the U.S. Copyright Office stated in a reply letter that the American artist Kristina Kashtanova obtained the copyright for the coordination and arrangement of text and visual elements in her comic work "Zarya of the Dawn" , whose copyright protection does not apply to parts generated by the AI painting tool Midjourney.
05 Domestic Precedents
In January 2020, there was a piece of news on the website of the National Copyright Administration, which introduced that the People’s Court of Nanshan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, in a copyright dispute case caused by AI-generated content, made a judgment for the first time that AI-generated Content can be included in the scope of copyright protection. Some people believe that this case provides a clearer legal basis for further putting AI technology into practice, and it also arouses the industry's attention and discussion on the copyright protection of AI-generated content.
This case was widely reported at the beginning, but three years later, I don't know if there will be some changes.
According to the point of view of this article, whether to enjoy copyright depends on whether there is originality.
In judicial practice, it is necessary to judge whether an expression is an independent creation, whether it can be distinguished from existing works in terms of external expression, and whether it enjoys the minimum degree of creativity.
"Artificial intelligence is an extension of the human brain and body. Its role in the creative process is only to reduce human intelligence and physical labor, which is not fundamentally different from the role played by traditional machines engaged in automated industrial production. Since the traditional The products produced by automated machines are the fruits of human labor, and there is no legal obstacle to treating artificial intelligence products as human intellectual achievements, that is, the expression of thoughts or emotions.” Sun Yat-sen University Law School Professor and China Intellectual Property Law Research Association Vice President Li Yang expressed this.
In addition, Li Yang believes: "Recognizing original artificial intelligence-generated content in the fields of literature, art, and science as works and protected by copyright will help encourage the creation and dissemination of works, promote cultural diversity, and encourage people to develop Artificial intelligence that can reduce human intellectual and physical labor, generate original works, and use this artificial intelligence to create works.”
06 My point of view
With the development of AIGC technology to the present level, we must consider the issue of copyright protection. I personally prefer the AI tool theory, that is, AIGC is a tool that helps users complete works. The creativity, ideas, and realization of this work And the choice is done by the user, including identifying whether the AI is talking nonsense. Just like I use image processing software to process my photos, I will not lose my copyright because of the photos I have processed. AIGC just has a higher degree of automation, including I asked him to produce a software, which is generated from the user's input, including accurate function descriptions, and subsequent necessary function adjustments. Therefore, unless there is a special agreement to use the AI tool, the user shall have the rights in this regard.
At the same time, providers of AI tools must also actively transfer rights in this area, because overemphasizing rights in this area may expand their own responsibilities due to rights in this area.
Finally, in terms of development, AIGC should also develop towards becoming a better tool.