A Study on the Copyright Judgment of AI Generated Images in Chinese and U.S. Courts

Generative artificial intelligence is being actively used to create content. However, under the current copyright law, it is not clear whether AI generated contents are subject to copyright protection, so there is a phenomenon in which human and AI are marked as co-authors on the cover of books and book information of Internet bookstores, while only the human’s name are listed in the book’s copyright information. This phenomenon increases confusion among content industry workers. Although Li v. Liu cases and Thaler v. Perlmutter cases are based on the principle that the works have to created by human, if it is confirmed that there was a ‘human involvement’ in the process of creating content using GAI, they judged that originality and creativity can be recognized. However, only the Chinese court presented specific criteria for judgment that copyrightability is recognized if ‘human involvement’ is proved with originality and creativity that is ‘distinct from previous works’. Many GAI is disclosed as an open source, and the generated results are often shared again and used for learning, I propose ‘selective protection’ that recognizes copyright only when ‘human involvement’ is disclosed as a copyright registration.

Publication Details

Journal
Korea Copyright Commission
Published
2024-09-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.30582/kdps.2024.37.3.5
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.35
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Study on the Copyright Judgment of AI Generated Images in Chinese and U.S. Courts

1 citations
Korea Copyright Commission
Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
0.35
article

A Study on the Copyright Judgment of AI Generated Images in Chinese and U.S. Courts

article en
1 citations

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence is being actively used to create content. However, under the current copyright law, it is not clear whether AI generated contents are subject to copyright protection, so there is a phenomenon in which human and AI are marked as co-authors on the cover of books and book information of Internet bookstores, while only the human’s name are listed in the book’s copyright information. This phenomenon increases confusion among content industry workers. Although Li v. Liu cases and Thaler v. Perlmutter cases are based on the principle that the works have to created by human, if it is confirmed that there was a ‘human involvement’ in the process of creating content using GAI, they judged that originality and creativity can be recognized. However, only the Chinese court presented specific criteria for judgment that copyrightability is recognized if ‘human involvement’ is proved with originality and creativity that is ‘distinct from previous works’. Many GAI is disclosed as an open source, and the generated results are often shared again and used for learning, I propose ‘selective protection’ that recognizes copyright only when ‘human involvement’ is disclosed as a copyright registration.

Korea Copyright CommissionVol. 147
Openalex Percentile: Top 33%
Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
0.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A Study on the Copyright Judgment of AI Generated Images in Chinese and U.S. Courts · Korea Copyright Commission (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS