[Valuable Intellectual Property] The World Falls into Chaos over AI-Created Works' Intellectual Property Rights

Protection of Creators vs. Promotion of AI Innovation... Opinions Divided
Fake News and Copyright Issues in News Content
Need to Revise Patent Systems Due to AI Regulations Worldwide

[Image source=Reuters Yonhap News]

"These machines do not have their own emotions, experiences, or dreams. They have simply taken millions of copyrighted songs and lyrics from the internet without permission."

On the 17th of last month, a hearing on AI and copyright law was held by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee. At this event, veteran singer and songwriter Dan Navarro attended and made the above statement. As a creator, he expressed opposition to the results generated by generative AI, which randomly learns from human-created works. However, Sy Damle, former legal counsel of the U.S. Copyright Office, said, "We must carefully evaluate whether intellectual property regulations on AI could hinder AI development within the United States."

Thus, at the hearing, the arguments "Creators must be protected from copyright infringement by AI" and "Innovation in AI technology within the U.S. must be promoted" were sharply contested.

Generative AI, symbolized by ChatGPT, is creating works that replace human intellectual effort. Accordingly, there is ongoing controversy over who owns the intellectual property rights to AI-generated creations or knowledge. This is an issue that can arise in all fields of intellectual property rights, including copyright, patents, trademarks, and designs, and has become a global concern. [Related article=AI Bursting with Ideas... How to Protect Rights?]

In neighboring Japan, the Newspaper Association has raised objections. The association expressed concern that news content created by AI could spread large amounts of inaccurate information, causing social confusion. They viewed that fake news, harmful information, and politically motivated opinion-manipulating articles could be mass-produced, or that news content could be indiscriminately used by AI, leading to legal issues such as copyright infringement. They also worried that articles with unclear authorship and content could be mass-produced on the internet by piecing together news reports from media outlets. In this regard, international academic journals such as Science and Nature do not approve papers listing ChatGPT as a co-author.

Italian furniture company 'Kartell' is selling AI chairs
[Image=Official Kartell Website]

Design works created by generative AI also carry the risk of copyright infringement. Works derived from learning vast amounts of data have a sufficient possibility of infringing on others' designs or copyrights. Even if the design is new, the question of who should be considered the creator of that design remains another issue. The famous Italian furniture brand Kartell is currently selling the world’s first chair designed with AI participation. This design is registered and protected by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), but this was possible because EU design law, unlike that of Korea or Japan, does not require the creator to be specified. If it had been filed in a country like Korea, where only natural persons (humans) can receive design rights, there would have been eligibility controversies.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is actively discussing the inventorship of AI, including whether AI involved in the invention process can be listed as an inventor on patent applications, by gathering diverse opinions from inventors, intellectual property (IP) experts, companies, and academia. In fields like the patent system, where global harmonization is necessary, international discussion trends must be closely monitored to prepare domestic law accordingly.

It is expected that AI-related regulations will be established in various countries in the future. If AI regulations are enacted in other countries, they may also affect domestic companies seeking to conduct AI-related businesses in those countries, so continuous monitoring is necessary. It is time for Korea, including the National Intellectual Property Committee and related ministries, to establish institutional directions aligned with international trends regarding the rights of AI-generated works.

※ This article references the Korea Intellectual Property Office’s "Global IP Field News" and the Korea Intellectual Property Research Institute’s report on "Legal Issues of Intellectual Property for Generative AI."