'There is no copyright in the works of art created by AI,' the US Copyright Office rejects the copyright of AI

Advances in technology have led to the emergence of AI

that creates art and AI that composes music . It turned out that the copyright authority in the United States decided that 'the work created by AI has no copyright' regarding the problematic 'copyright of art generated by AI'.

2022.02.14 SIGNED Paradise (AI) Draft Review Board Letter
(PDF file) https://www.copyright.gov/rulings-filings/review-board/docs/a-recent-entrance-to-paradise.pdf

The US Copyright Office says an AI can't copyright its art --The Verge

On February 14, 2022, the United States Copyright Office announced that it had rejected an application requesting that paintings generated by an algorithm named 'Creativity Machine' be copyrighted. In the announcement, the agency stated that it had decided that 'AI-generated images do not contain the'human copyright'element, which is the standard required to be protected by copyright.' increase.

Below is the work 'A Recent Entrance to Paradise' by Creativity Machine, which AI researcher Stephen Sailor sought for copyright protection. This image is one of the series entitled 'Near-death experience simulation' by Mr. Sailor, and it is a work produced by reprocessing the photo using an algorithm. It's not that people aren't involved at all, including the original photo, but the fact that human intervention is minimal is the reason why it was judged that there was no element of human copyright. Have been seen.

Not limited to this work, copyright protection authorities and courts consider that 'the connection between the human spirit and creative expression' is an important component of copyright, and write for works created by non-human subjects. He is reluctant to recognize his rights. For example, in a 1997 trial in which the intellectual property rights of an emerging religion's scripture allegedly written by a revelation from heaven were at issue, the court said, 'What is the intention of copyright law to protect? Because it is not a creation of a divine being, the book requires a human creative element to be copyrighted ' (PDF file ) .

Also, in a trial in which the copyright of selfies by wild monkeys became a problem, the US judicial authorities ruled that 'monkeys cannot own the copyright of the photo that the monkey accidentally pressed the shutter'. Did.

The copyright-questioned 'Monkey Self-portrait' court battle is finally over-GIGAZINE

According to the IT news site The Verge, the decision on AI paintings does not mean that all AI-related artworks are not copyrighted. So if someone claims that someone else's work is 'AI-generated,' the result may be different. It is also possible that the Copyright Office will make a different decision if Mr. Sailor files a complaint about another work.

On top of that, The Verge said, 'This decision by the Copyright Office emphasizes the importance of human independence in machine-generated works. However, AI will play a major role in the artist's activities in the future. If we do, we believe that the limits of this conclusion will continue to be tested. '

In addition, Mr. Sailor tried to apply for AI as an inventor of the patent before, but at this time also failed to register the patent because the United States Patent and Trademark Office judged that 'only natural persons can be inventors'. I am.

'AI cannot be registered as an inventor at the time of patent application,' the US Patent and Trademark Office announces an official opinion --GIGAZINE

in Software,   Art, Posted by log1l_ks