Yashvir Maurya, (Intellectual Property), Amity University, UP, Amity Law School Noida
Amy Kannan, (Intellectual Property), Amity University, UP, Amity Law School Noida
Teli Tekam, (Intellectual Property), Amity University, UP, Amity Law School Noida
ABSTRACT
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming multiple sectors such as entertainment, healthcare, education, and technology, raising complex legal issues surrounding copyright and authorship. As AI becomes increasingly involved in producing creative works, there is no consensus on how to address AI-generated content within current copyright structures. Three key positions have emerged: (i) granting AI the status of an author under copyright law, (ii) categorizing AI-generated works as public domain content, and (iii) proposing a new legal framework specifically designed to address these works. The debate centres around whether non-human entities like AI should enjoy the same rights as human creators, or if its creations should remain open to public use.
Traditionally, copyright law is meant to reward human creativity, but its application to AI-generated works is complicated. Advocates for recognizing AI as an author argue that machine-generated creativity should be valued similarly to human creativity. However, critics caution that this could undermine the value of human authorship and stifle innovation. Additionally, AI-generated content could be flawed, biased, or even harmful, leading to legal concerns about liability, particularly when such content causes defamation or incites violence. The issue of the copyright duration also becomes problematic, as AI can produce an unlimited number of works without experiencing fatigue or aging, challenging the traditional human- based approach.
The Indian case Amar Nath Sehgal v. Union of India highlighted that moral rights are inherent to human authors and cannot apply to AI. Similarly, in Camlin Pvt. Ltd. v. National Pencil Industries, the court ruled that a machine cannot be considered an author, reinforcing the notion that copyright protection is for natural persons, not AI.
International treaties such as the TRIPs Agreement and Berne Convention do not address non-human authorship, but they allow countries to implement stronger protections. Moreover, technologies like deep fakes present additional legal challenges, such as privacy violations, defamation, and unauthorized usage.
Comments