1
00:00:00,050 --> 00:00:03,890
Lessen intellectual property rights and AI system ownership.

2
00:00:03,890 --> 00:00:10,100
Intellectual property rights and AI system ownership present intricate and multifaceted challenges within

3
00:00:10,100 --> 00:00:11,900
the realm of AI governance.

4
00:00:12,290 --> 00:00:18,050
The rapid advancements in artificial intelligence necessitate a reevaluation of traditional intellectual

5
00:00:18,050 --> 00:00:24,020
property frameworks, raising questions about the ownership, protection, and ethical implications

6
00:00:24,020 --> 00:00:26,180
of AI generated content.

7
00:00:26,570 --> 00:00:32,720
This lesson delves into the complexities of IPR as they pertain to AI systems, examining the current

8
00:00:32,750 --> 00:00:39,230
legal landscape, the proprietary rights of AI developers, and the potential future direction of intellectual

9
00:00:39,230 --> 00:00:40,190
property law.

10
00:00:42,020 --> 00:00:47,450
AI systems, particularly those utilizing machine learning and deep learning algorithms, have the capability

11
00:00:47,450 --> 00:00:53,270
to create original works from music and art to software, code and scientific research.

12
00:00:54,440 --> 00:01:00,830
The novelty and originality of these AI generated outputs prompt a crucial question who owns the intellectual

13
00:01:00,830 --> 00:01:03,020
property rights to these creations?

14
00:01:03,470 --> 00:01:09,080
Traditional IPR frameworks, which include copyrights, patents, trademarks, and trade secrets are

15
00:01:09,080 --> 00:01:12,020
largely predicated on human authorship and invention.

16
00:01:12,020 --> 00:01:18,140
Thus, extending these rights to AI systems or their developers requires significant legal and philosophical

17
00:01:18,140 --> 00:01:19,310
reconsideration.

18
00:01:21,080 --> 00:01:27,050
From a legal perspective, current intellectual property laws do not explicitly recognize AI systems

19
00:01:27,050 --> 00:01:29,300
as entities capable of holding rights.

20
00:01:29,750 --> 00:01:35,450
Copyright law, for instance, grants protection to original works of authorship that are fixed in a

21
00:01:35,450 --> 00:01:40,370
tangible medium of expression, with the author typically being a human creator.

22
00:01:40,910 --> 00:01:47,270
However, when an AI system generates a work, independently attributing authorship becomes problematic.

23
00:01:47,270 --> 00:01:53,360
One pertinent example is the case of the AI generated painting Portrait of Edmond de Bellamy, which

24
00:01:53,360 --> 00:01:58,760
sold for $432,500 at Christie's auction in 2018.

25
00:01:59,210 --> 00:02:04,490
The painting was created using a generative adversarial network developed by the Paris based collective

26
00:02:04,520 --> 00:02:05,330
obvious.

27
00:02:05,600 --> 00:02:11,300
This sale raised significant debate about whether the AI, the developers or the collective should hold

28
00:02:11,300 --> 00:02:12,830
the copyright to the painting.

29
00:02:14,360 --> 00:02:16,730
Patent law faces similar challenges.

30
00:02:17,090 --> 00:02:23,720
Patents protect inventions that are novel, non-obvious, and useful, typically requiring a human inventor.

31
00:02:24,020 --> 00:02:30,710
The concept of I as an inventor was tested in the case of Dabus, an AI system that generated two inventions

32
00:02:30,740 --> 00:02:35,960
a fractal based beverage container and a neural flame device for search and rescue missions.

33
00:02:36,440 --> 00:02:42,410
When patent applications were filed listing Dabus as the inventor, they were rejected by the US Patent

34
00:02:42,410 --> 00:02:47,420
and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office on the grounds that an inventor must be a natural

35
00:02:47,420 --> 00:02:48,140
person.

36
00:02:48,350 --> 00:02:55,130
These rejections underscore the current limitations of patent law in accommodating AI generated inventions.

37
00:02:57,260 --> 00:03:01,610
The implications of these legal challenges extend beyond mere ownership.

38
00:03:02,090 --> 00:03:06,650
They touch upon ethical considerations and the potential stifling of innovation.

39
00:03:07,790 --> 00:03:13,430
On one hand, granting intellectual property rights to AI systems or their developers could incentivize

40
00:03:13,430 --> 00:03:18,680
further advancements in AI technology, promoting economic growth and technological progress.

41
00:03:19,120 --> 00:03:25,420
On the other hand, it raises concerns about monopolistic practices and the concentration of power in

42
00:03:25,420 --> 00:03:28,720
the hands of a few AI developers or corporations.

43
00:03:29,500 --> 00:03:35,290
Moreover, the issue of AI system ownership is not confined to the realm of intellectual property alone.

44
00:03:35,290 --> 00:03:40,720
It encompasses broader questions about accountability, liability, and transparency.

45
00:03:41,320 --> 00:03:47,410
For instance, if an AI system generates a defamatory or harmful piece of content, determining liability

46
00:03:47,410 --> 00:03:48,670
becomes convoluted.

47
00:03:48,670 --> 00:03:53,530
Should the AI developer, the user, or the AI system itself be held accountable?

48
00:03:53,560 --> 00:03:58,900
These questions highlight the need for a comprehensive and adaptive legal framework that can address

49
00:03:58,900 --> 00:04:01,780
the multifaceted nature of AI systems.

50
00:04:03,370 --> 00:04:09,070
One potential approach to addressing these challenges is the development of new legal categories, or

51
00:04:09,070 --> 00:04:13,840
doctrines, that specifically account for AI generated works and inventions.

52
00:04:14,680 --> 00:04:20,620
This could involve creating a sui generis system of protection that recognizes the unique characteristics

53
00:04:20,620 --> 00:04:26,920
of AI generated content, while balancing the interests of AI developers, users, and society at large.

54
00:04:27,460 --> 00:04:32,740
Alternatively, existing intellectual property laws could be amended to explicitly include provisions

55
00:04:32,740 --> 00:04:38,740
for AI generated works providing clearer guidelines on authorship, ownership and liability.

56
00:04:40,450 --> 00:04:46,540
Another important consideration is the role of international cooperation and harmonization in addressing

57
00:04:46,570 --> 00:04:49,090
IPR and AI system ownership.

58
00:04:49,870 --> 00:04:55,660
Given the global nature of AI development and deployment, inconsistencies in national laws can create

59
00:04:55,690 --> 00:04:59,200
legal uncertainties and hinder cross-border innovation.

60
00:04:59,890 --> 00:05:05,170
International organizations such as the World Intellectual Property Organization play a crucial role

61
00:05:05,170 --> 00:05:10,930
in facilitating dialogue and cooperation among member states to develop coherent and harmonized approaches

62
00:05:10,930 --> 00:05:13,330
to AI and intellectual property.

63
00:05:15,340 --> 00:05:21,820
Furthermore, ethical considerations must be at the forefront of discussions on IPR and AI system ownership.

64
00:05:21,940 --> 00:05:28,630
The potential for AI systems to perpetuate biases, infringe on privacy, and exacerbate social inequalities

65
00:05:28,660 --> 00:05:32,660
necessitates a careful and inclusive approach to approach to policy making.

66
00:05:33,260 --> 00:05:39,260
Engaging diverse stakeholders, including ethicists, technologists, legal experts and representatives

67
00:05:39,260 --> 00:05:45,560
from marginalized communities is essential to ensure that the development and implementation of AI technologies

68
00:05:45,560 --> 00:05:49,310
are aligned with societal values and ethical principles.

69
00:05:50,660 --> 00:05:56,210
In conclusion, the intersection of intellectual property rights and AI system ownership presents a

70
00:05:56,210 --> 00:06:01,400
complex and evolving landscape that requires thoughtful and adaptive legal frameworks.

71
00:06:01,790 --> 00:06:07,850
While current IPR laws are not fully equipped to address the unique challenges posed by AI generated

72
00:06:07,850 --> 00:06:13,640
content, there are promising avenues for reform and innovation, whether through the creation of new

73
00:06:13,640 --> 00:06:20,600
legal categories, amendments to existing laws or international cooperation, it is imperative to develop

74
00:06:20,600 --> 00:06:26,690
policies that balance the interests of all stakeholders and promote the responsible and equitable development

75
00:06:26,690 --> 00:06:28,280
of AI technologies.

76
00:06:29,120 --> 00:06:35,060
The ongoing dialogue and research in this field will play a crucial role in shaping the future of intellectual

77
00:06:35,060 --> 00:06:37,250
property and AI governance.