Navigating the Complex World of AI and Intellectual Property Law
, by Unboxify, 3 min reading time
The Intersection of AI and Intellectual Property Law: Unraveling the Complexities
With the rise of artificial intelligence, the landscape of intellectual property (IP) law is undergoing rapid transformation. AI technologies are making waves and introducing new challenges that were once unimaginable. This blog explores some of the most intriguing and significant legal cases that lie at the intersection of AI and IP law, shedding light on the complexities and potential future implications.The Copyright Conundrum 🤔
Thaler v Perlmutter: Can AI-Created Works Be Copyrighted?
The lack of clarity regarding copyright protection for AI-created works is epitomized by the case Thaler v Perlmutter. In 2018, Dr. Stephen Thaler applied for copyright protection for a piece of art generated by his AI system. The Copyright Office rejected his application, arguing that creative works must have human authorship to be copyrightable.- The Copyright Office's stance: No copyright protection for AI-generated works.
- Thaler's response: He sued and lost but has appealed the ruling. A decision is expected by the end of this year.
The Monkey Selfie Case: When Animals Get Creative
In 2011, wildlife photographer David Slater encountered a peculiar situation. A monkey named Naruto took self-portraits using Slater's unattended camera. PETA argued that Naruto should own the copyright. However, the court concluded that the photographs lacked human authorship because Naruto is a monkey.Kris Kashtanova and Midjourney: The Human Touch in AI Art
Artist Kris Kashtanova used a generative AI tool called Midjourney to create artwork for a graphic novel. Although Kashtanova made some edits using Photoshop, the Copyright Office deemed them too minor for copyright protection. They did indicate, however, that sufficient human authorship could warrant protection.- Key point: Minor edits by humans may not suffice for copyright protection.
- Debate: What level of human intervention is required for AI-assisted works to be copyrightable?
Right of Publicity and AI 🌟
Reface App: Unconsented Use of Likeness
The Reface app, known for its face-swapping capabilities, landed in legal trouble when Kyland Young, a former contestant on CBS's "Big Brother," claimed the app used his image without consent, violating his right of publicity. Young argued that the commercial use of his likeness was the core of the issue.- Reface's defense: They argued that the app's output is derivative and covered by the Copyright Act.
- Outcome: Young's images were removed, but the legal battle over right of publicity continues.
The Vanna White Case: The Right to Publicity Precedent
In 1992, Vanna White sued Samsung for using a robot resembling her in an advertisement. The court ruled in her favor, establishing a key precedent for right of publicity claims. This case underscores the difficulties Neocortex might face in defending against Young's lawsuit.Training Data and Copyright 📚
The Artists' Lawsuit Against AI Companies
One of the earliest legal battles over AI training data was initiated by a group of artists in 2023. They argued that companies like Midjourney and Stability AI used their copyrighted works, without authorization, to train AI models.- Argument: The unauthorized use of copyrighted works for training AI models constitutes copyright infringement.
- Legal Standard: Courts use substantial similarity to determine infringement, focusing on the similarities in protectable elements.
HIQ v LinkedIn: Data Scraping Legality
A precedent that could influence AI training data cases is HIQ v LinkedIn. HIQ was scraping publicly available data from LinkedIn to develop recruiting software. The court ruled that scraping public data is permissible, but with a caveat: platforms must ensure that AI-generated output doesn't infringe on copyrights.The Future Legal Landscape 🌐
AI technology is advancing at a breakneck pace, posing new questions and challenges for the law. The introduction of tools like OpenAI’s text-to-video generator "Sora" further complicates the scenario, as it might inadvertently create modified versions of recognizable trademarks. The conundrum surrounding AI and IP laws is forcing legal systems worldwide to rethink, reapply, and sometimes, rewrite existing laws. As technology continues to evolve, so will the legal frameworks that govern it. Stay tuned as we watch how these landmark cases shape the future of AI and intellectual property law.Blog posts
-
, by Author Article title
-
, by Author Article title
-
, by Author Article title