Artificial intelligence and copyright: a study on the british regulation
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
La publicación se distribuye bajo la licencia Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Los derechos de los trabajos publicados en esta revista son propiedad del autor y son libres de distribuir y difundir las mismas fuentes siempre que cite correctamente la fuente de publicación y estos actos no tengan fines comerciales.
Main Article Content
Abstract
Recently, the Chilean Government has issued its National Policy on Artificial Intelligence, which proposes the adaptation of the intellectual property regime to incentivising and strengthening the artificial intelligence (AI) related creativity. The British legislation is usually referred to show a potential regulation of autonomously AIcreated works. In this context, the article analyses the reach of the copyright protection of “computer-generated works” under the British copyright law. Therefore, the article seeks to determine whether the British regime protects the autonomously AI-generated works and, thus, serve as an input to the Chilean legislative discussion.
References
Abbot, Ryan (2020): “Artificial Intelligence, big data and Intellectual Property: Protecting computer generated works in the United Kingdom”, en Aplin, Tanya (ed.), Research Handbook on Intellectual Property and Digital Technologies (Reino Unido y Estados Unidos, Elgar Edward), pp. 322-337.
Azuaje, Michelle (2020): “Protección jurídica de los productos de la inteligencia artificial en el Sistema de propiedad intelectual”, Revista Jurídica Austral, Vol. 1, Nº 1, pp. 319-342. https://doi.org/10.26422/RJA.2020.0101.azu
Comisión Europea, Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology (2022): Study on Copyright and New Technologies: Copyright Data Management and Artificial Intelligence. https://bit.ly/3xid0qo.
Deloitte (2021): Becoming an AI-fueled organization (4ª ed., Deloitte Insights). https://bit.ly/3Ob32hz.
Escott, Eban (2017): “What are the 3 types of AI? A guide to narrow, general, and super artificial intelligence”, https://bit.ly/3tswfwq [Fecha de consulta: 20.03.2022].
Gaon, Aviv (2021): The future of copyright in the age of artificial intelligence (Reino Unido y Estados Unidos, Elgar Law).
Gervais, Daniel (2021). “The Human Cause”, Vanderbilt Law Research Paper No. 21-39. http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3857844.
Ginsburg, Jane (2003): “The concept of authorship in comparative copyright law”, DePaul Law Review, Vol. 52, Nº4, pp. 1063-1092.
Gobierno de Chile, Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología, Conocimiento e Innovación (2021): Política nacional de inteligencia artificial, disponible en https://bit.ly/3998sux [Fecha de consulta: 20.03.2022].
Griffiths, Jonathan (2013), “Dematerialization, pragmatism and the European copyright revolution” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, (33),4, pp. 767-790. https://ibit.ly/n5a3
Guadamuz, Andres (2017): “Do androids dream of electric copyright? Comparative analysis of originality in artificial intelligence generated works”, Intellectual Property Quarterly, Nº 2, pp. 169-186.
Kurzweil, Ray (2005): The singularity is near: when humans transcend biology (Estados Unidos, Rick Kot ed.).
Landes, William y Posner, Richard (1989): “An Economic Analysis of Copyright”, The Journal of Legal Studies, (18)2, pp. 325-363.
Lee, Jyh-An (2021): “Computer-generated works under the CDPA 1988”, en: Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property, Lee, Jyh-An, Hilty, Reto M. y Liu, Kung-Chung (eds.), (Reino Unido, Oxford University Press).
McCutcheon, Jani (2013): “Curing the authorless void: protecting computer-generated works following IceTV and phone directories”, Melbourne University Law Review, 37(1), pp. 46-102.
Merges, Robert (2011): Justifying Intellectual Property, (Estados Unidos, Harvard University Press). Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual (2019): Dialogo de la OMPI sobre Propiedad Intelectual (PI) e Inteligencia Artificial (IA), Segunda sesión, Borrador del documento temático sobre las políticas de PI y la Inteligencia Artificial. WIPO/IP/AI/FE/20/1. https://bit.ly/3MxpKPH
Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual (2020): Dialogo de la OMPI sobre Propiedad Intelectual (PI) e Inteligencia Artificial (IA), Segunda sesión. Versión revisada del documento temático sobre las políticas de propiedad intelectual y la inteligencia artificial. WIPO/AI/2/GE/20/1 https://bit.ly/3QfeCdl
Osorio, Felipe (2021): “Entre el derecho de autor y el copyright: análisis del efecto expansivo de la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea en el copyright británico”, Revista Chilena de Derecho y Tecnología, 10(2), pp. 174-210.
Rahmatian, Andreas (2013): “Originality in UK copyright law: the old ‘skill and labour’ doctrine under pressure”, IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 44, pp. 4-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-012-0003-4
Ramalho, Ana (2017): “Will robots rule the (artistic) world? A proposed model for the legal status of creations by artificial intelligence systems”, Journal of Internet Law, 21, (1), pp. 12-25.
Ricketson, Sam (1991-1992): “The 1992 Horace S. Manges Lecture - People or machines: the Berne Convention and the changing concept of authorship”, Columbia VLA Journal of Law & the Arts; 16(1), pp. 1-38. https://ibit.ly/lIPE
Schafer, Burkhard, Komuves, David, Niebla, Jesús Manuel y Diver, Laurence (2015): “A fourth law of robotics? Copyright and the law and ethics of machine co-production”, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 23(3), pp. 217-240. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10506-015-9169-7
Senftleben, Martin y Buijtelaar, Laurens (2020): “Robot creativity: An incentive-based neighboring rights approach”. http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3707741
Simone, Daniela (2020): “Intervention on the WIPO Conversation on Intellectual Property in Artificial Intelligence Second Session. Issue 7: Authorship and Ownership”, https://bit.ly/3NCXEni.
United States Copyright Office (2021): Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practice (3ª ed.), disponible en: https://bit.ly/3O0vwKw [Fecha de consulta: 20.03.2022].
Whitford Committee (1977): Whitford Committee on Copyright and Design Law, Cmmnd. 6732.
Legislación citada
Chile
Ley Nº 17.336 sobre Propiedad Intelectual (Diario Oficial 2 de octubre 1970).
India
The Copyright Act, 1957 (Act Nº 14 of 1957).
Reino Unido
Copyright, Designs and Patents (Act 1988).
Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual
Convenio de Berna para la protección de las obras literarias y artísticas (enmendado el 28 de septiembre de 1979
Jurisprudencia
Canadá
CCH Canadian v. Law Society of Upper Canada (2004) 1 SCR 339.
Chile
Jaime Federico Clavijo Días con Municipalidad de Viña del Mar, Corporación Deportiva Everton (2000):
Corte Suprema, rol 1756-1999.
Estados Unidos
Feist Publications, Inc. vs. Rural Telephone Service Co. (1991), 499 U.S. 340
Second request for reconsideration for refusal to register a recent entrance to paradise (2022): Copyright
Review Board, 14 de febrero de 2022, disponible en https://bit.ly/39kDXBU [Fecha de consulta:
03.2022].
Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea
Infopaq International A/S con Danske Dagblades Forening (2009): Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea,
C-5/08.
Reino Unido
University of London Press con University Tutorial Press (1916) 2 Ch 601.
Express Newspapers plc con Liverpool Daily Post & Echo [1985] 3 All ER 680.
Nova Productions Limited con Mazooma Games Limited and Others [2006] EWHC 24 (Ch).
Nova Productions Limited con Mazooma Games Limited and Others [2007] EWCA Civ. 2019.
SAS Institute con World Programming [2013] EWHC 69 (Ch).
Páginas Web
https://www.inapi.cl/portal/institucional/600/w3-article-1192.html.