How To Define The Content By AI In Copyrightability And Copyright Attribution

With the continuous updating and iteration of artificial intelligence technology,new legal issues continue to arise,which requires appropriate interpretation or adjustment of the original legal system.Artificial intelligence technology is a gradual,evolving process.At this stage,human beings can already generate textual content,musical content,and artistic content through the use of artificial intelligence technology.As the son of technology,copyright law also needs to respond appropriately to a series of issues arising in the field of copyright law in the fields of artificial intelligence and big data.Among them,the first questions that need to be answered are:the copyrightability issues and copyright ownership issues of artificial intelligence-generated content.On the premise of responding to these two questions,we can respond to the subsequent specific related content ownership arrangements.The problem of copyrightability of artificially generated content,that is,whether the generated content can constitute a "work" in the sense of copyright law.Regarding the copyrightability of artificial intelligence-generated content,there is still a great deal of controversy in this field at present,but basically it can be divided into three categories,namely positive,negative and eclectic.In terms of creative principles,human beings are developers and users of artificial intelligence technology.Although artificial intelligence technology has certain autonomy in generating content,it cannot do without human beings' presupposition of content paradigms and in the creative process.The choice and arrangement of materials by human beings,therefore,affirm their work attributes are feasible in fact.From the perspective of legal doctrine,constitutive works require that they be original and reproducible.When judging the originality of artificial intelligence generated content,the previous view is that artificial intelligence does not have the qualifications of a civil subject,so it denies its originality.However,from a theoretical point of view,the existing law does not stipulate whether the creative subject must be human,so it is advisable to avoid the creative subject standard,and judging its creativity directly can solve this problem well.As for its reproducibility,in the Internet era,any type of content can be expressed by "0 and 1".It is undisputed that such generated content is reproducible.In addition,from the perspective of promoting technological development,encouraging creativity,and not being sure about the opportunistic behavior issues that may arise from its copyrightability,it is also necessary to identify its copyrightability issues.After affirming the question of copyrightability,another question that needs to be answered is:how should this right attribution be determined.Although artificial intelligence as a legal subject can respond to the ownership of rights,it will have a great impact on China's civil subject system and is not realistically operable.Some scholars have also claimed that the right to generate content generated by artificial intelligence belongs to the public domain,but this is contrary to the incentive principles in the copyright legal system.It has no positive effect on the prosperity of the cultural market or the stimulation of the development of technology,let alone the The above has stimulated the creative subject.To recognize the ownership of the rights of artificial intelligence-generated content,we must first understand the relationship between humans and artificial intelligence.If this relationship is defined as an instrumental relationship,this attribution issue can therefore be well explained from the existing copyright law.In addition,recognizing this tool relationship has a good incentive and promotion role in promoting the development of scientific and cultural undertakings,maintaining the stability of the legal system,and stimulating the development of artificial intelligence technology.Based on this kind of instrumental relationship,in response to the question of the ownership of rights,the work attribute of artificially generated content should first be legally defined.From the perspective of the creative subject,the articles of natural and legal works should respond to this.From the perspective of the original statutory works,the relevant provisions of professional works,cooperative works and commissioned works should be appropriately supplemented and reasonably explained.Therefore,from the issue of copyrightability to the determination of the ownership of rights,to the specific arrangements of the ownership of rights,a good explanation can be obtained from the identification of this instrumental relationship.