Intellectual property law and generative artificial intelligence: fair remuneration, equality or ‘My plentie makes me poore’

Abstract Intense debates are occurring on the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI). Most of these debates are horizontally fragmented along existing categories of legal fields, such as human rights, international trade, competition law or IP law. They are also vertically divided along the distinct lines of national, regional and global levels of lawmakers. Combined with several misconceptions about the underlying concepts, the result of this fragmentation is that it obscures the fundamental problems that need to be addressed to ensure global sustainable development in the future. Exemplified by the debate on the impact of AI on IP law, this article argues that the primary focus of the debate on the IP protection of AI-generated works, the liability resulting from the infringement of IP-protected works by AI-generated works and the infringement of existing IP-protected works based on the training of AI foundational models are misguided. Instead, the central focus should be on the increase in inequalities throughout the world and critically assessing the role of IP law in this trend. To this end, the article seeks to illustrate the shortcomings of IP law prior to the advent of AI and to re-establish the goal of the original function of IP, which is to provide fair remuneration to all types of creators to serve the benefits of wider society. It concludes that IP law’s pioneering role in innovation should continue to contribute to the establishment of a fairer system of financial compensation for all creative work in the future.