Research On Judicial Protection Path Of Artificial Intelligence Generating Content

With the improvement of artificial intelligence anthropomorphic technology,its self-generated content has more and more acquired the level of natural person works,conforms to its appearance constituent elements,and has considerable copyright market value.How to establish the legal nature of such products and give legal protection to their legitimate rights and interests has become an important issue that both legal practice and theoretical circles must respond to.Marked by the 2018 Beijing Internet Court accepting the dispute over copyright infringement of artificial intelligence-generated content "China's first case ",it shows that the mode of solving such problems through conventional legislation can not meet its realistic urgency,and the law of artificial intelligence-generated content The shift from legislative and institutional protection research to judicial protection research is necessary.The research on the judicial protection of artificial intelligence generated content,on the one hand,can provide the necessary judicial response for the legitimate rights and interests of the existing artificial intelligence generated content,on the other hand,it can further explore the legislative necessity and feasibility of artificial intelligence generated content protection.This paper first from two typical cases,using case analysis method,reveals the current situation of artificial intelligence generated content judicial protection in China.Through the comparative analysis of the judge's thinking and results in the judgment,it is confirmed that the following main problems exist in the judicial decision process:first,there are insufficient claims of facts in the case,lack of credibility of the facts of evidence,lack of necessary argumentation in the judgment facts;second,in the legal characterization,there are such problems as not distinguishing ideas and expressions,identifying the author as the constituent elements of the work,and denying the originality of the result by process originality.After that,the root causes of these problems are analyzed,and the main crux of the problem lies in the asymmetry between facts and norms in the process of law application.The main performance is:(1)artificial intelligence as a cutting-edge science and technology has a high degree of professionalism and complexity,non-computer professionals can hardly achieve the basic nature of artificial intelligence and work mechanism in-depth understanding.Most judges do not have a science or engineering background,and their knowledge of artificial intelligence is more limited,which in turn affects their recognition of the fact that artificial intelligence is generated.(2)In order to maintain the stability and universality of legal norms,legislators are willing to adopt them at the beginning of legislation The use of semantic ambiguity,extension,or multiple meanings of words,resulting in the relevant legal text has a greater ambiguity.(3)Artificial intelligence,as a new thing,has the characteristics of rapid development,wide range of influence and close relationship with social subjects,and the existing legal norms related to it are seriously out of step.Finally,from the artificial intelligence generation product protection mode and the right attribution two aspects to how to solve this kind of problem through the justice has carried on the beneficial exploration.First,through the work protection model,adjacent rights protection model,anti-unfair competition law protection model,intellectual property rights fruits protection model introduction and comparative analysis.It is proved that the protection path of adopting the work mode in the judicial process can more accord with the legislative purpose of copyright law,realize the incentive function of copyright law,avoid the occurrence of blasphemy and achieve the protection of artificial intelligence industry.At the same time,using the work model to protect the content of artificial intelligence generation,can use the system interpretation and historical interpretation to prove the pattern of the work.The second is to demonstrate the view that rights should be attributed to those who make the necessary arrangements for the content generated by artificial intelligence.In view of the ownership of artificial intelligence to generate content,some scholars believe that we should follow the practice of international Saudi Arabia,the European Union and other countries and international organizations to formulate artificial intelligence as the legal subject,and fundamentally solve the related disputes about artificial intelligence.There is no denying that this kind of view has certain foresight and rationality,but the rationality and feasibility do not mean that the fictitious subject is the best or the only solution,at least from the judicial level,the fictitious subject is not realistic and urgent.Therefore,the author first excludes the view that the right belongs to artificial intelligence.Under this premise,the right should be vested in the person who makes the necessary arrangements for the production of AI content,that is,the programmer,the investor or the user.Considering the close degree of people and artificial intelligence generation process,and the balance of interests,the rights belong to the users to meet the legislative purposes of copyright law and market transaction rules.