1,721,149 research outputs found
When the Robots (try to) Take Over: Of Artificial Intelligence, Authors, Creativity and Copyright Protection
No full textAs works are increasingly produced by machines using artificial intelligence (AI) systems, with a result often difficult to distinguish from that of a human creator, the question of what should be the appropriate response of the legal system and, in particular, of the copyright system has become central. If the creative input of the author has traditionally been the generator of copyright protection, AI forces to reassess what in the creative process is special in human creativity and where the creative input lies in AI-generated works. But it also poses more fundamental questions on what the copyright system should achieve and who/what it should protect. In particular, as many human authors will potentially face the competition of these AI machines on the market, new ways of remunerating human creators have to be imagined while making sure that the copyright system does not stand in the way of these important technological developments.
This contribution analyses the copyright issues related to so-called “generative AI” systems and reviews the arguments currently advanced to change the copyright regime for AI-generated works. It is argued that the copyrightability of AI-generated outputs should be considered with outmost care and only when AI is used as a technical tool for creators in their creation process- meaning when they can serve a human author. At the same time, AI systems are here to stay, and their development should not be inhibited as they can have many beneficial aspects (including for creators) if appropriately regulated. For this reason, it is proposed that the machine learning process using copyright-protected works to train the AI gives rise to a limitation-based remuneration right to the benefit of human creators.
More generally, it is argued that for the EU to continue to be a vibrant place for culture and creativity, (finally) cherishing and putting the Human Author at the center of the copyright system is necessary (and not only to built-up protection/fences to the benefit of copyright industries). In doing so, we might be able to have in the future AI-robots that serve creators and creativity, and not the other way around
The Forgotten Creator: Towards a Statutory Remuneration Right for Machine Learning of Generative AI
No full textGenerative AI is disrupting the creative process(es) of intellectual works on an unparalleled scale. Algorithmic tools are increasing users’ production capacity of literary and artistic works to almost infinite levels. However, the quality of the outputs is strictly dependent on the quantity and quality of the inputs, some of which are protected by copyright. This scenario gave rise to tensions between copyright holders and generative AI companies. While the formers claim control over this new kind of exploitation of their works, the latters wish to train their algorithms freely with as many contents as possible. This contribution suggests exploring the idea of introducing a statutory license for machine learning purposes as a compromise solution to ensure an attractive environment for the development of artificial intelligence without marginalizing the role played by human authors. This remuneration proposal is rooted in a fundamental rights analysis that balances i.e., the right to science and culture and freedom of artistic expression (Arts. 11 and 13 EUCF, 19 UDHR, 27.1 UDHR, 15.1 a and b ICESCR) vis-à-vis the right for creators to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from their scientific, literary or artistic production (Arts. 17.2 EUCF, 27.2 UDHR, and 15.1 c ICESCR)
Fashion, Intellectual Property and Freedom of Artistic Expression in the Age of Metaverse and AI: A Digital Constitutionalist-Approach
No full textThe fashion industry boasts one of the largest market shares for e-commerce. Statical projections indicate that the global fashion e-commerce market will benefit from continuous growth. In this context, intellectual property rights ('IPRs'), mainly trademarks, copyright and designs, have a role to play when protecting fashion items. However, they are also increasingly confronted by new creative practices made possible in the digital environment, fueled by advancements in frontier technologies, such as blockchain and artificial intelligence. The trait d'union of these conducts is the artistic (re)use of the IP protected fashion works without the consent of rightsholders. Courts are tasked with resolving the tensions between creators invoking freedom of artistic expression (Arts. 11 and 13 EUCF) and fashion houses seeking exclusive control over their creative works (Art. 17.2 EUCF). By way of drawing a parallel between trademark, designs and copyright litigations in the fashion industry, this article introduces a matrix containing some interpretative coordinates also grounded in the doctrine of digital constitutionalism to address the clashes between those fundamental rights which occur in the virtual fashion world(s) too
Building an Ethical Framework for Intellectual Property in the EU: Time to Revise the Charter of Fundamental Rights
No full textTaking fundamental rights seriously in the Digital Services Act's platform liability regime
Full text linkThis article highlights how the EU fundamental rights framework should inform the liability regime of platforms foreseen in secondary EU law, in particular with regard to the reform of the E-commerce directive by the Digital Services Act. In order to identify all possible tensions between the liability regime of platforms on the one hand, and fundamental rights on the other hand, and in order to contribute to a well-balanced and proportionate European legal instrument, this article addresses these potential conflicts from the standpoint of users (those who share content and those who access it), platforms, regulators and other stakeholders involved. Section 2 delves into the intricate landscape of online intermediary liability, interrogating how the E-Commerce Directive and the emerging Digital Services Act grapple with the delicate equilibrium between shielding intermediaries and upholding the competing rights of other stakeholders. The article then navigates in Section 3 the fraught terrain of fundamental rights as articulated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) under the aegis of the European Convention on Human Rights and the EU Charter. This section poses an urgent inquiry: can the DSA's foundational principles reconcile these legal frameworks in a manner that fuels democracy rather than stifles it through inadvertent censorship? Section 4 then delves into the intricate relationship between fundamental rights and the DSA reform. This section conducts a comprehensive analysis of the key provisions of the DSA, emphasising how they underscore the importance of fundamental rights. In addition to mapping out the framework's strengths, the section also identifies existing limitations within the DSA and suggests potential pathways for further refinement and improvement. This article concludes by outlining key avenues for achieving a balanced and fundamental rights-compliant regulatory framework for platform liability within the EU.<br/
'Fair Use' through Fundamental Rights: When Freedom of Artistic Expression allows Creative Appropriations and Opens up Statutory Copyright Limitations
Full text linkThis chapter discusses the evolution in jurisprudential understanding of the relationship between copyright and freedom of artistic expression in the European Union. It demonstrates how courts in France and several other EU member states have accepted a “fair use” approach that applies fundamental rights as external limitations to copyright law, in compliance with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights but contrasting with the recent conflicting position of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The chapter first analyses the application of freedom of artistic expression to copyright law on a case-by-case basis and shows that, although long contested, such an approach is now mandated by EU primary law, thus “flexibilizing” significantly the legal framework in this area. It then examines the balancing act between fundamental rights and copyright, with particular attention paid to the weight the judiciary should afford freedom of artistic expression versus copyright law in cases of creative appropriation, in order to comply with the obligations resulting from European, national, and international human rights provisions. Finally, the chapter concludes with a discussion and evaluation of the growing need for legislative reform to render freedom of artistic expression fully compatible with copyright law in the context of creative reuses of protected works
Excluding Intellectual Property from Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreements: A Lesson from the Global Health Crisis
No full textThis chapter critically analyses the inclusion of intellectual property (IP) in the investment chapters of free trade agreements and bilateral investment treaties as well as their submission to their related investor state dispute settlement (ISDS). It argues that these developments pose a serious threat to a balanced and ethical innovation system. In part this is because when regulating IP to foster non-economic interests, the possibility of ISDS creates uncertainty about the ability of states to protect human rights and matters of public interest by limiting IP rights, even when such action is perfectly legitimated by the international IP system and its flexibilities. The COVID pandemic health crisis showed how important it can be for the EU, the global community and for individual States to provide access to vaccines and treatment, and how unacceptable it might be for transnational corporations to use ISDS to limit this life-saving activity. As a result, it is argued that IP should in the future be excluded from the investment chapter of bilateral trade and investment treaties
Crafting a Text and Data Mining Exception for Machine Learning and Big Data in the Digital Single Market
No full text- …
