The United States copyright issued The guidance of AI this week that stated that there are no laws that are not clarified when it comes to protecting the authorship of humans that produce works assisted by AI.
“The questions about the copyright and AI can be resolved in accordance with the existing law, without the need for a legislative change,” said the copyright office.
More than 10,000 commentators intervened in the guide, and some hoped to convince the copyright office to guarantee more protections for artists as IA and the line technologies advance between the works created by humans and AI seems to blur every time further.
But the copyright office insisted that the copyright debate of AI was established in 1965 after commercial computer technology began to advance rapidly and that the “difficult questions of authorship” were raised for the first time. That was the first time that officials had to reflect on how much participation the human creators had in works created using computers.
At that time, the copyright registration, Abraham Kaminstein, which was also instrumental in the coding of fair use, suggests that “there is no unique answer” to copyright questions about computer -assisted human authorship. And the copyright office agrees that this remains the case today.
“Very few brilliant line rules are possible,” said the copyright office, with an obvious exception. Due to the “insufficient human control over the expressive elements” of the resulting works, “if the content is generated completely by AI, cannot be protected with copyright.”
The office also clarified that this does not mean that AI works can never have copyright.
“When AI simply helps an author in the creative process, its use does not change the copyright capacity of production,” said the copyright office.
After Kaminstein’s advice, officials plan to continue reviewing the disseminations of AI and weighing, case by case, what parts of each work are authors of AI and which parties are authors of being human. Any expressive element authorized by the human being can have copyright, said the office, but any aspect of work that is considered to have been purely generated by AI cannot.