Who is the author of the AI-generated work?

The evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) has brought with it the ability to create original works, ranging from paintings and music to texts and film scripts. However, this innovation also raises an important question: who should be considered the author of these creations?

Currently, legislation attributes copyright ownership to natural persons, which creates uncertainties regarding the legal protection of works produced by AI. In this context, different perspectives emerge regarding ownership rights. Some argue that machines cannot be considered authors, as they lack the inherent creativity and individuality of human creators. For these proponents, authorship should remain exclusively with humans. On the other hand, there are those who maintain that if AI can autonomously create using algorithms and machine learning, it should be recognized as the author of the work. This view considers that creativity is not solely restricted to humans but can also emerge from intelligent systems.

Ensuring adequate protection for works created by AI poses a significant challenge for copyright law. Current legislation was developed with a focus on human creation and does not explicitly address works generated by machines. Therefore, it is imperative to adapt the law to address this ever-evolving new reality. To tackle these challenges, seeking legal and technological solutions is essential. One possible approach is revising copyright laws to include specific provisions for works created by AI. This could involve assigning specific legal protection to these creations and defining clear criteria for determining ownership rights. In this way, we would ensure a solid foundation to protect both human creators and the contributions of artificial intelligence (AI).

Several legislative initiatives are underway to adjust copyright laws to accommodate new AI practices. In Europe, a 2019 directive now permits so-called “data mining,” even on copyrighted content, as long as that content is publicly accessible. This exception was designed to foster the development of AI technologies. In Brazil, legal research focuses on evaluating the role of human users and AI programs in creating works to determine authorship and ownership of copyright. Additionally, a proposed bill (4025/23) requires express authorization from involved parties for the use of images and works by AI systems, proposing changes to the Civil Code and Copyright Law. In the United States, the Copyright Office declined to grant rights to a comic created by an AI system. This suggests that while current U.S. legislation favors AI, it does not recognize it as the author of a work.

In summary, the field of AI-related copyright is constantly evolving, filled with challenges and uncertainties. Defining copyright ownership in works produced by AI and effectively protecting these creations are crucial issues that require review and adaptation of existing laws. Although legislation is beginning to adapt to AI practices, there is still much work to be done. The question of authorship and ownership of copyright in AI-generated works is complex and necessitates careful analysis and adjustments to existing laws. AI has a significant impact on education and academia, and it is essential to continue exploring and understanding these matters.