(Source: Cipit.org)

Intellectual Property Rights in the Digital Age: Who Owns AI-Generated Works?
By Adinda Ardita

In the rapidly evolving digital landscape, artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer just a tool—it has become a creator. From composing symphonies to generating photorealistic images and writing entire books, AI is reshaping the boundaries of creativity. But as these AI-generated works proliferate, a fundamental legal and ethical question emerges: Who owns the intellectual property (IP) of creations made by AI?

The Rise of AI-Generated Content

AI tools like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, and image generators like Midjourney and DALL·E are producing content that rivals, and sometimes surpasses, human creativity. These technologies rely on large datasets and machine learning algorithms to produce novel works with little to no human input. But the law has not yet caught up with this innovation.

The Human Authorship Principle

Most current intellectual property frameworks are built around the idea of human authorship. For instance, the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and national copyright laws like those in the United States and European Union specify that copyright subsists in works of authorship created by a human.

This means that if a work is created entirely by an AI with no human creative input, it may not qualify for copyright protection at all. This has been confirmed by multiple legal authorities:

  • In 2022, the U.S. Copyright Office denied copyright protection for an AI-generated artwork created by Stephen Thaler’s “Creativity Machine,” stating that “copyright law only protects the fruits of intellectual labor that are founded in the creative powers of the [human] mind.”
  • Similarly, in 2023, a UK court ruled that only humans can be considered inventors or authors under current IP law.

Can the User Claim Ownership?

When a human prompts an AI to generate content, the question of ownership becomes more complex. The extent of human involvement—such as the creativity, originality, and intent behind the prompts—can influence whether the user might be seen as the legal author. Some legal experts argue that if the user’s input meaningfully shapes the final output, they could have a valid claim to copyright. However, this remains a gray area, as courts and scholars continue to debate where to draw the line, with concerns that recognizing such claims could lead to a surge of subjective and inconsistent ownership disputes.

On the other hand, some have questioned whether the developers of AI systems should hold rights over the content their tools generate, given that they created the underlying technology. Despite this, most major AI companies—such as OpenAI—state in their terms of service that users retain ownership of the outputs they produce, aside from certain exceptions. This approach relies primarily on contractual agreements rather than established copyright law, which has yet to fully address the complexities introduced by AI-generated content.

Conclusion

As AI continues to evolve as a creative force, legal systems around the world will need to adapt accordingly. Potential solutions include introducing new categories of intellectual property law specifically for AI-generated works, exploring shared ownership models between users and developers, requiring clear disclosure when content is created by AI, and establishing ethical standards and licensing rules for the datasets used to train these systems. Until such frameworks are in place, creators, developers, and users remain in a legal gray area—one that is likely to see significant shifts and clearer regulation in the coming years.

References

  • U.S. Copyright Office. (2022). Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence.
    https://www.copyright.gov/ai/
  • Thaler v. Perlmutter, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Case No. 1:22-cv-01564 (2023).
  • UKIPO (UK Intellectual Property Office). (2023). Copyright and AI: Call for Views.
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/copyright-and-artificial-intelligence-call-for-views
  • WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization). (2021). WIPO Technology Trends 2021: Artificial Intelligence.
    https://www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4526
  • Cynthia Nzuki. (2022). Intellectual Property and Arificial aiantelligence: Can Artificial Intellligence Receive Copyright Protection?. https://cipit.org/intellectual-property-and-artificial-intelligence-can-artificial-intelligence-receive-copyright-protection/