The algorithmic muse and the public domain: Why copyright’s legal philosophy precludes protection for generative AI outputs

IF 3.3 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Ezieddin Elmahjub
{"title":"The algorithmic muse and the public domain: Why copyright’s legal philosophy precludes protection for generative AI outputs","authors":"Ezieddin Elmahjub","doi":"10.1016/j.clsr.2025.106170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Generative AI (GenAI) outputs are not copyrightable. This article argues why. We bypass conventional doctrinal analysis that focuses on black letter law notions of originality and authorship to re-evaluate copyright's foundational philosophy. GenAI fundamentally severs the direct human creative link to expressive form. Traditional theories utilitarian incentive, labor desert and personality fail to provide coherent justification for protection. The public domain constitutes the default baseline for intellectual creations. Those seeking copyright coverage for GenAI outputs bear the burden of proof. Granting copyright to raw GenAI outputs would not only be philosophically unsound but would also trigger an unprecedented enclosure of the digital commons, creating a legal quagmire and stifling future innovation. The paper advocates for a clear distinction: human creative contributions to AI-generated works may warrant protection, but the raw algorithmic output should remain in the public domain.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51516,"journal":{"name":"Computer Law & Security Review","volume":"58 ","pages":"Article 106170"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Law & Security Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212473X25000434","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Generative AI (GenAI) outputs are not copyrightable. This article argues why. We bypass conventional doctrinal analysis that focuses on black letter law notions of originality and authorship to re-evaluate copyright's foundational philosophy. GenAI fundamentally severs the direct human creative link to expressive form. Traditional theories utilitarian incentive, labor desert and personality fail to provide coherent justification for protection. The public domain constitutes the default baseline for intellectual creations. Those seeking copyright coverage for GenAI outputs bear the burden of proof. Granting copyright to raw GenAI outputs would not only be philosophically unsound but would also trigger an unprecedented enclosure of the digital commons, creating a legal quagmire and stifling future innovation. The paper advocates for a clear distinction: human creative contributions to AI-generated works may warrant protection, but the raw algorithmic output should remain in the public domain.
算法缪斯和公共领域:为什么版权的法律哲学排除了对生成人工智能输出的保护
生成AI (GenAI)输出不受版权保护。这篇文章探讨了其中的原因。我们绕过传统的理论分析,重点放在黑体字法的原创性和作者的概念,重新评估版权的基本哲学。GenAI从根本上切断了人类创造性与表达形式的直接联系。传统的功利主义激励理论、劳动报酬理论和人格理论未能为保护提供连贯的理由。公共领域构成了智力创造的默认基线。那些为GenAI的产出寻求版权保护的人承担举证责任。将GenAI的原始成果授予版权不仅在哲学上是不合理的,而且还会引发对数字公地前所未有的封闭,造成法律困境,扼杀未来的创新。这篇论文主张明确区分:人类对人工智能作品的创造性贡献可能需要保护,但原始算法输出应留在公共领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
10.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: CLSR publishes refereed academic and practitioner papers on topics such as Web 2.0, IT security, Identity management, ID cards, RFID, interference with privacy, Internet law, telecoms regulation, online broadcasting, intellectual property, software law, e-commerce, outsourcing, data protection, EU policy, freedom of information, computer security and many other topics. In addition it provides a regular update on European Union developments, national news from more than 20 jurisdictions in both Europe and the Pacific Rim. It is looking for papers within the subject area that display good quality legal analysis and new lines of legal thought or policy development that go beyond mere description of the subject area, however accurate that may be.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信