Convergence of Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property Rights

I. Zenin
{"title":"Convergence of Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property Rights","authors":"I. Zenin","doi":"10.18572/2072-4322-2021-1-4-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose is to identify and evaluate the doctrinal definitions of the concept and recommendations on ensuring the protection of the results created by AI as products of the functioning of its technologies using the norms of the current copyright, patent and other legislation. At the same time, the goal of scientific evaluation of the existing legal definitions of the concept of AI and its accompanying categories is pursued. The methodology includes methods of logical, historical, systematic and comparative legal analysis of legal definitions, methods of translation (implementation) of doctrinal categories in normative legal acts, interpretation of differences in copyright and patent protection of the results of human creative activity and the need to take them into account when deciding on the possibility of legal protection of products generated by artificial intelligence. Result. As part of the assessment of the existing doctrinal and legal definitions of the concept of AI, its technologies and the possibilities of protecting the protective results created in the course of their operation, conclusions are drawn in favor of legal structures. In the sense of the latter: artificial intelligence is recognized as a human-created “complex of technological solutions”; operations performed by this complex are not identified with human actions, but are recognized only as their similarity (“imitation»); the results of these operations are not equated with the creative achievements of the natural (human) mind, but are recognized as their visibility, which can only be compared (“compared”) with the products of the cognitive functions of the human brain as the results of its “intellectual activity”.","PeriodicalId":88929,"journal":{"name":"Marquette intellectual property law review","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Marquette intellectual property law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18572/2072-4322-2021-1-4-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose is to identify and evaluate the doctrinal definitions of the concept and recommendations on ensuring the protection of the results created by AI as products of the functioning of its technologies using the norms of the current copyright, patent and other legislation. At the same time, the goal of scientific evaluation of the existing legal definitions of the concept of AI and its accompanying categories is pursued. The methodology includes methods of logical, historical, systematic and comparative legal analysis of legal definitions, methods of translation (implementation) of doctrinal categories in normative legal acts, interpretation of differences in copyright and patent protection of the results of human creative activity and the need to take them into account when deciding on the possibility of legal protection of products generated by artificial intelligence. Result. As part of the assessment of the existing doctrinal and legal definitions of the concept of AI, its technologies and the possibilities of protecting the protective results created in the course of their operation, conclusions are drawn in favor of legal structures. In the sense of the latter: artificial intelligence is recognized as a human-created “complex of technological solutions”; operations performed by this complex are not identified with human actions, but are recognized only as their similarity (“imitation»); the results of these operations are not equated with the creative achievements of the natural (human) mind, but are recognized as their visibility, which can only be compared (“compared”) with the products of the cognitive functions of the human brain as the results of its “intellectual activity”.
人工智能与知识产权的融合
其目的是确定和评估这一概念的理论定义,并建议使用现行版权、专利和其他立法的规范,确保将人工智能创造的结果作为其技术功能的产物加以保护。同时,力求对人工智能概念及其相关类别的现有法律定义进行科学评价。方法论包括法律定义的逻辑、历史、系统和比较法分析方法,规范法律行为中理论类别的翻译(实施)方法,对人类创造性活动结果的版权和专利保护差异的解释,以及在决定对人工智能产生的产品进行法律保护的可能性时考虑到这些差异的必要性。结果。作为对人工智能概念的现有理论和法律定义、人工智能技术以及保护其运作过程中产生的保护性结果的可能性进行评估的一部分,得出了有利于法律结构的结论。从后者的意义上说:人工智能被认为是人类创造的“技术解决方案综合体”;这个综合体执行的操作不等同于人类的行为,而只是被认为是它们的相似性(“模仿”);这些操作的结果不等同于自然(人类)思维的创造性成就,而是被认为是它们的可见性,这只能与作为其“智力活动”结果的人类大脑认知功能的产物进行比较(“比较”)。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信