Research on Copyright Protection of Works Generated by ChatGPT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/jid.v4i1.11429Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Copyright Law, Copyright Attribution, Copyright MarketAbstract
There has been a debate about whether ChatGPT should have copyright. On the one hand, some people believe that AI creations meet the protection requirements of the Copyright Law, and their creative ability and creativity are comparable to those of human creators; On the other hand, there are also those who disagree, arguing that artificial intelligence, as a machine, lacks the qualities of perception and emotion, cannot be treated on an equal footing with human creators, and therefore should not enjoy copyright. In addition, the global legislative status and controversy regarding the copyright ownership of artificial intelligence is also an issue worthy of concern. This article will explore the essential difference between human authors' works and ChatGPT creations, so as to determine whether ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence should enjoy copyright at the legal level. The protection of artificial intelligence copyright is conducive to the more effective and convenient development of the creative field of this era, and artificial intelligence creations can also expand human creative capabilities to a certain extent, human authors do not need to reject artificial intelligence too much, artificial intelligence as a tool, but will create greater commercial value.
Downloads
References
Wu Handong. (2020) Questions about the copyright law of AI-generated works. Sino-Foreign Law, 32(03):653-673.
Feng Xiaoqing. (2022) Copyright Law. Law Press, Beijing.
Guan Xin. (2023) Copyright protection of artificial intelligence creations. Shanghai Commerce, 528(02):216-218.
Yang Zhixiang, Dai Xingyu. (2022) On the copyright of artificial intelligence products. Legal System and Economy, 31 (03): 88-91.
Wang Yi. (2023) Artificial Intelligence and Digital Creative Industry: Integration, Development and Innovation. Journal of Shanghai University (Social Science Edition), 40(03):100-111.