人类对基于人工智能的产出的创造性贡献——一个人不能满足

K. Militsyna
{"title":"人类对基于人工智能的产出的创造性贡献——一个人不能满足","authors":"K. Militsyna","doi":"10.1093/grurint/ikad075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The article attempts to clarify the issue of the copyrightability of AI-based output by streamlining the assessment of human creative contribution to the creation process assisted by generative AI systems. It starts with briefly outlining the state of the art of modern generative AI systems contributing to a better understanding of AI. Then the article presents a five-part test to distinguish between sufficient and insufficient human creative participation and contemplates the following authorship scenarios: sole authorship of AI designers or users; their joint authorship; and non-authorship. The article proceeds with applying the test to output produced using Midjourney, a generative AI tool. It concludes that in many cases of using AI to create output human creative participation remains sufficient for copyright protection eligibility. However, there are also developments and circumstances that drive the increase in ‘authorless’ AI-based output. Moreover, depending on the specific circumstances, using even the same AI system may lead to different test results.","PeriodicalId":432164,"journal":{"name":"GRUR International","volume":"28 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human Creative Contribution to AI-Based Output – One Just Can(’t) Get Enough\",\"authors\":\"K. Militsyna\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/grurint/ikad075\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The article attempts to clarify the issue of the copyrightability of AI-based output by streamlining the assessment of human creative contribution to the creation process assisted by generative AI systems. It starts with briefly outlining the state of the art of modern generative AI systems contributing to a better understanding of AI. Then the article presents a five-part test to distinguish between sufficient and insufficient human creative participation and contemplates the following authorship scenarios: sole authorship of AI designers or users; their joint authorship; and non-authorship. The article proceeds with applying the test to output produced using Midjourney, a generative AI tool. It concludes that in many cases of using AI to create output human creative participation remains sufficient for copyright protection eligibility. However, there are also developments and circumstances that drive the increase in ‘authorless’ AI-based output. Moreover, depending on the specific circumstances, using even the same AI system may lead to different test results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":432164,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"GRUR International\",\"volume\":\"28 2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"GRUR International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikad075\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GRUR International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikad075","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文试图通过简化人类对生成式人工智能系统辅助的创造过程的创造性贡献的评估,来澄清基于人工智能的输出的可版权性问题。它首先简要概述了现代生成人工智能系统的艺术状态,有助于更好地理解人工智能。然后,文章提出了一个由五部分组成的测试,以区分充分和不充分的人类创造性参与,并考虑以下作者情况:人工智能设计师或用户的单独作者;他们的共同作者身份;和non-authorship。本文接着将测试应用于Midjourney(一个生成式AI工具)产生的输出。它的结论是,在许多使用人工智能创造输出的情况下,人类的创造性参与仍然足以获得版权保护资格。然而,也有一些发展和情况推动了“无作者”人工智能产出的增长。此外,根据具体情况,即使使用相同的人工智能系统也可能导致不同的测试结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Human Creative Contribution to AI-Based Output – One Just Can(’t) Get Enough
The article attempts to clarify the issue of the copyrightability of AI-based output by streamlining the assessment of human creative contribution to the creation process assisted by generative AI systems. It starts with briefly outlining the state of the art of modern generative AI systems contributing to a better understanding of AI. Then the article presents a five-part test to distinguish between sufficient and insufficient human creative participation and contemplates the following authorship scenarios: sole authorship of AI designers or users; their joint authorship; and non-authorship. The article proceeds with applying the test to output produced using Midjourney, a generative AI tool. It concludes that in many cases of using AI to create output human creative participation remains sufficient for copyright protection eligibility. However, there are also developments and circumstances that drive the increase in ‘authorless’ AI-based output. Moreover, depending on the specific circumstances, using even the same AI system may lead to different test results.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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