The problem of determining the subject of copyright for works created by artificial intelligence
The problem of determining the subject of copyright for works created by artificial intelligence
Читать книгу   Download pdf
О чем книга?

The article examines the status of the author of works created as a result of the activity of artificial intelligence. Since the duration of legal protection depends on the duration of the author's life, in conjunction with the norms of Article 1257 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, we can conclude that a work as an object of copyright can only be created by a person. Nevertheless, the presence of the figure of a secondary copyright holder allows us to talk about the possibility of removing the personalist approach to copyright in a work. In this regard, it is quite acceptable to assume the possibility of expanding or reinterpreting the concept of "author of a work" in the context of works created by artificial intelligence, which would allow us to consider a wide range of subjects as authors, and not limit it only to individuals - the creators of the work.

The article examines the possibility of recognizing as the author of a work created by artificial intelligence, the user, the programmer and the artificial intelligence itself.

Against the user a strong AI, it is recommended, based on the paragraph 2 section 1 of article 1228 of the civil code of the Russian Federation, to recognize the user by the right holder of the work as against the user weak artificial intelligence to apply article 1257 of the Civil Code and to recognize the user by the author created works, and artificial intelligence technology tool that helps the user in his creative activity.

It is proposed not to consider the author of a computer program as the author and secondary copyright holder of a work created by artificial intelligence. The programmer owns the author's personal non-property rights to the computer program created by him, and, if he did not perform this work as part of his labor functions or did not transfer his rights under a civil law contract, also the exclusive rights to this program.

The conclusion is formulated that if we recognize legal personality only in relation to strong and super-strong artificial intelligence, then in relation to the concept of copyright, this means that only artificial intelligence that is able to independently and independently of the will of its creators (developers) to carry out conscious creative activity can be considered as a subject of copyright.

Об авторах
Ekaterina A. Sviridova
Associate Professor of the Department of legal regulation of economic activity, Faculty of Law at Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
References

1. Artefact Design. Au Japon, l’agence McCANN Millennials a imaginé une intelligence artificielle capable de penser comme un directeur créatif. Agence de publicité et communication globale, 12.04.2017. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.facebook.com/agence.artefactdesign/posts/434960100181821/ (дата обращения: 20.10.2020).

2. Bernault С., Lucas А., Lucas-Schloetter А. Traité de la Propriété Littéraire et Artistique. LexisNexis, 2017. P. 142.

3. Bourcier Danièle, De Filippi Primavera. Les robots seront-ils les artistes de demain. La Tribune, 2 mars 2018 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.latribune.fr/opinions/tribunes/les-robots-seront-ils-les-artistes-de-demain-770046.html> (дата обращения: 12.10.2020).

4. Bridy Annemarie. Coding Creativity: Copyright and the Artificially Intelligent Author // Stanford Technology Law Review. 2012; 5:1-28. Р. 25.

5. Devillers L. Des robots et des hommes, mythes fantasmes et réalités. Éditions Plon. Paris, 2017. Р. 79.

6. Final Report of the National Commission on New Technology Uses of Copyrighted Works, 2003 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://digital-law-online.info/CONTU/ (дата обращения: 12.10.2020).

7. Guadamuz A. L'intelligence artificielle et le droit d'auteur // Journal de l' OMPI. 2017; (5): 14-19.

8. Kaleagasi B. A New AI Can Write Music as Well as a Human Composer. Futurism, 09.03.2017. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://futurism.com/a-new-ai-can-write-musicas-well-as-a-human-composer/ (дата обращения: 15.10.2020).

9. Larrieu Jacques. Les robots et la propriété intellectuelle // Dalloz IP/IT. 2016;(6):291-294. Р. 291.

10. Magenta. Fact sheet: Make Music and Art Using Machine Learning. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://magenta.tensorflow.org/ (дата обращения: 15.10.2020).

11. Sandy Caron. La protection des créations générées par intelligence artificielle par le droit d'auteur canadien // Maîtrise en droit. Université Laval Québec, Canada Maître en droit (LL.M.) et Université Paris-Sud Orsay, France Master 2 (M2), 2018.

12. Soulez Marie. Le droit de la propriété intellectuelle à l'épreuve des technologies robotiques // La semaine juridique - Édition Générale. 2016;(37):1674-1675.

13. Taylor Jones Christopher. La musique et l’intelligence artificielle. Paroles & Musique, 07.11.2017. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.magazinesocan.ca/features/lamusique-et-lintelligence-artificielle/ (дата обращения: 15.10.2020).

14. Touati Arnaud. IA et propriété intellectuelle, un enjeux clef du 21ème siècle. Journal du Net, 20.12.2016. [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.journaldunet.com/economie/expert/65903/ia-et-proprieteintellectuelle--un-enjeux-clef-du-21eme-siecle.shtml (дата обращения: 10.10.2020).

15. Tual Morgane. Intelligence artificielle: quand la machine imite l'artiste // Le Monde, 8 Septembre 2015 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2015/09/08/intelligence-artificielle-les-machines-peuvent-elles-etrecreatives_4749254_4408996.html (дата обращения: 20.1.2020).

16. Vivant M., Bruguière J.-M. Droit d’auteur et droits voisins. 4e éd. Dalloz, 2019. Р. 119.