As the rise of AI reshapes creative industries, discussions about intellectual property rights and ownership of AI-generated content are set to intensify heading into 2025.
As businesses continue to adapt in an era increasingly dominated by artificial intelligence (AI), robust discussions surrounding intellectual property (IP) protection are emerging as a significant focus heading into 2025. Key considerations centre on works created by AI and the implications for existing copyright laws.
The intricate dialogue surrounding the legal frameworks for AI-generated content remains a pressing issue. Current copyright laws primarily require human authorship for protection, leading to ambiguity in scenarios where AI contributes significantly to creative outputs. The generative AI Overview function of Google points to this as potentially the most critical intellectual property issue to address in the year ahead. Stakeholder concerns about ownership are paramount, with questions arising over whether the AI developer, the user prompting the AI, or the original data used to train the AI model should hold that rights.
Experts have largely called for new regulatory frameworks to cater to the unique challenges posed by AI-generated content. As Anton Blijlevens, a principal at AJ Park in Auckland, conveyed in comments to Asia IP, legislative clarifications concerning how AI-generated works fall under IP law are likely necessary due to the changing landscape. “This will likely lead to reforms in IP laws to clarify how AI-created works are protected and how responsibility is assigned,” he noted.
In the European context, conversations around AI-related IP protection are expected to intensify. One commentator mentioned that 2025 will be shaped by “technological advances, evolving regulatory priorities, and shifts in global market dynamics,” drawing attention to the need for coherent ownership guidelines for AI-generated works.
Calls for international cooperation on these pressing issues have become increasingly loud, echoing the sentiments of Kathi Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property, who advocated for a global framework that balances innovation and protection. While the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has gathered significant momentum in discussing these matters since 2019, solid steps towards substantial regulatory action remain elusive.
While broader AI IP questions seem unlikely to be resolved soon, the landscape surrounding deepfakes may witness more immediate legislative attention. The proliferation of deepfake technology has captured the interest of US lawmakers, particularly given its implications for identity theft and disinformation. Recent discussions surrounding the bipartisan-supported Take It Down Act—a proposed federal measure targeting deepfake sexual exploitation—point to a growing determination to combat these emerging threats.
As the incidents of AI-driven scams, including sophisticated phishing frauds and deepfake impersonations, escalate, lawmakers appear poised to take action. The recent Congressional report has labelled deepfakes as a “real and current problem” that demands attention, suggesting that legislation addressing their harmful applications is expected to progress in 2025.
Amidst this evolving landscape, significant attention is also directed to the potential jurisdictional implications surrounding platforms like Amazon. The Supreme Court of the United States is poised to reconsider fundamental questions of jurisdiction as they relate to patent infringement cases, particularly ones involving sales on these expansive digital marketplaces. The upcoming case, Snap Power v. Lighting Defense Group, raises critical concerns about whether specific jurisdiction can be invoked based on activities tied to the online selling environment.
Overall, as we approach the new year, discussions surrounding AI’s nascent role in creative output and the complexities of ownership within the digital landscape remain at the forefront. Various stakeholders are anticipating significant developments in the regulatory frameworks governing intellectual property in light of rapid technological advancements. In the coming months, as the dialogue continues and legal frameworks evolve, the balance between fostering innovation and protecting original creators will undoubtedly remain a central theme for businesses and regulators alike.
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://www.techtarget.com/searchcontentmanagement/answer/Is-AI-generated-content-copyrighted – Explains that under U.S. copyright law, works must have a human author to be copyrightable, and discusses the ambiguity and legal challenges surrounding AI-generated content.
- https://guides.lib.usf.edu/c.php?g=1315087&p=9690822 – Details that material created by generative AI tools does not currently receive copyright protections in the United States and highlights the need for human authorship for copyright protection.
- https://www.cooley.com/news/insight/2024/2024-01-29-copyright-ownership-of-generative-ai-outputs-varies-around-the-world – Discusses how under current U.S. law, there is no ownership of AI-generated works, and only human-authored aspects of a work can be protected by copyright.
- https://guides.lib.usf.edu/c.php?g=1315087&p=9690822 – Mentions the ‘Snoopy Problem’ where AI models can ‘memorize’ and generate copyrighted works, and discusses ongoing lawsuits related to the use of artists’ and writers’ content to train AI models.
- https://www.techtarget.com/searchcontentmanagement/answer/Is-AI-generated-content-copyrighted – Addresses the issue of copyright infringement for AI-generated content, including the test of access and substantial similarity, and the potential for fair use defenses.
- https://www.cooley.com/news/insight/2024/2024-01-29-copyright-ownership-of-generative-ai-outputs-varies-around-the-world – Provides an example of the U.S. Copyright Office’s decision regarding the comic book ‘Zarya of the Dawn,’ where protection was denied for AI-generated images but allowed for human-authored elements.
- https://www.techtarget.com/searchcontentmanagement/answer/Is-AI-generated-content-copyrighted – Highlights the need for clear regulatory frameworks to address the unique challenges posed by AI-generated content and the importance of international cooperation.
- https://guides.lib.usf.edu/c.php?g=1315087&p=9690822 – Notes the ongoing lawsuits against AI image and text generation platforms for using copyrighted content without permission, which underscores the need for legislative clarifications.
- https://www.cooley.com/news/insight/2024/2024-01-29-copyright-ownership-of-generative-ai-outputs-varies-around-the-world – Discusses the global variations in copyright ownership of generative AI outputs and the call for a global framework to balance innovation and protection.
- https://www.techtarget.com/searchcontentmanagement/answer/Is-AI-generated-content-copyrighted – Mentions the potential legislative attention to deepfakes, including the Take It Down Act, and the growing determination to combat AI-driven scams and disinformation.
- https://guides.lib.usf.edu/c.php?g=1315087&p=9690822 – Emphasizes the importance of obtaining permissions before using copyrighted material to train AI models and the implications for various publication arenas.
