DIGITAL ART BY AI AND ITS IP CHALLENGES

AI art, created using algorithms and deep learning models, challenges traditional notions of creativity and copyright. The absence of a human author complicates legal attribution and ownership. Future copyright laws must adapt, balancing human creativity with AI contributions, while addressing ethical concerns and ensuring fair use and consent.

DIGITAL ART BY AI AND ITS IP CHALLENGES

INTRODUCTION

AI art, or artificial intelligence art, refers to the pieces of art that are created, or improved using artificial intelligence techniques. Although AI art is frequently associated with images and videos, it incorporates audio works, including music           .

In the past, art advancement has solely been as a result of human imagination, right from prehistoric artists’ work, which included paintings on the walls of caves, to any artistic work done in recorded history. These pieces were created by motivated people employing their hands, for example, through use of instruments or brushes. However, with AI art, this process is completely altered, and the whole idea of what art is and how it is made is challenged.

AI-Generated Art: Where Artistry Meets Algorithms

Before exploring the complexities of copyright registration and ownership, it is essential to understand the emergence of AI-generated art. At the heart of this creative transformation are algorithms, especially deep learning models like Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and neural networks. These algorithms scrutinize vast datasets of existing art, music, literature, and other creative works to identify patterns and generate new, original pieces. AI-generated art epitomizes the blend of human creativity in developing algorithms and the machine's capability to autonomously produce artworks.

To thoroughly examine the issue of ownership, it is crucial to comprehend the traditional notion of copyright. Copyright laws are intended to protect the rights of creators. When individuals dedicate their time, skill, and imagination to creating original content, they receive exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, display, and profit from their works. Historically, these rights have been assigned to human creators, forming the foundation of copyright law.

Hurdles and Disputes in Copyrighting AI Art     

AI art has many issues and controversies mainly on copyright. A traditional human author is absent, the process of copyright attribution is rather complex, the work is based on pre-existing data and trained on pre-existing content, so the question of AI art ownership arises; some critics don’t even consider AI art as original and creative enough to be protected by a copyright or licensed, some people consider it as replication. Further, the use of AI in creating new pieces of art has also raised concerns that the created art looks very much like the copyrighted work and thus is violating the copyright law. The constant progress in technology and changing laws also make the problem more challenging as ethical questions about AI art and the potential reduction of people’s value in art arise.

The legal issue of whether or not AI can be considered as an author of a work is debatable. Currently, there is no specific case or Indian Copyright Office policy on authorship by a computer or software in India. The Indian Copyright Office itself is in doubt regarding the dealing with such applications. Office refused the application in the year 2020 where there was only AI (RAGHAV) mentioned as the creator of a particular artwork. However, this was in a subsequent application where a natural person and AI (RAGHAV) were jointly named as co-authors of another artwork, in which case the office registered. The ground for this registration is not apparent and it appears that the Copyright Office might have erred as it subsequently issued a withdrawal notice approximately a year later. The notice shifted the onus to the applicant to notify the office of the legal status of the AI tool which is Raghav Artificial Intelligence Painting App.

The human co-author is now claiming that once one gets a copyright registration the registration cannot be revoked and this has to go through a rectification process to be nulled in court. The author of this notice issued this around November 2021, and the current status of the proceeding cannot be determined. However, on the website of the Copyright Office, the mentioned application is still presented as registered.

While this scenario is not recent, the problem is still current because the creation of AI art is becoming increasingly popular. As long as this type of registration is not formally deleted or changed (if changes are possible), it could be used as a precedent for subsequent applications. Sadly, the Copyright Office now seems to think that copyright protection means human authorship is needed but may be stuck with this opinion because of previous decisions. In future, if they are denied, then the applicants can sue the rejection in court of law.

The “Portrait of Edmond de Belamy” Case (2018):The “Portrait of Edmond de Belamy” Case (2018)            :
In 2018, an art group called Obvious based in Paris made an artwork known as ‘Portrait of Edmond de Belamy’ through an application of artificial neural network. While no legal case was made out of this, this particular piece of art that was created using AI, became one of the most debated subjects in relation to copyright and authorship in the sphere of AI art.

Mario Klingemann’s AI Artworks :
Mario Klingemann is one of the leading AI artists who has produced many AI-art pieces, some of which have been sold as NFTs. Such transactions have been followed by legal issues regarding ownership of copyrights and intellectual property rights in the growing legal realm of AI art.           

Copyright Law and the AI Art of the Future       
With the dawn of a new age of artistic creativity, the future of copyright laws regarding AI generated art is still yet to be seen and is an interesting topic. Lawyers, painters, computer scientists, politicians and other professionals are today involved in dialogue to decide the next course of action. Some of the proposed solutions are formation of new types of copyright and generation of specific licenses for AI products. Also, the process of attaining international standards so that copyright gets the same treatment all over the world is becoming more and more real.   

Ethical Considerations        
Thus, legal solutions for the protection of AI art copyright are not the only important factors influencing the development of this sphere – the ethical aspect plays a significant role as well. Questions like who controls the process of making AI art, can the human subjects give their consent to the usage of their data, and can AI art be used to exploit the subjects, are some of the questions that raise ethical questions. The guidelines are being drafted in order to pay homage to the creativity of man while acknowledging the new role of the machines in the artistry. Artists’ integrity is affected as AI tools copy images from millions of artists and their works are copyrighted.

Conclusion

AI art is revolutionizing traditional notions of creativity and copyright, presenting unique challenges and opportunities in the legal and ethical landscapes. The absence of a clear human author complicates copyright attribution, raising questions about originality and ownership. Legal precedents, like those in India and cases such as "Portrait of Edmond de Belamy" and Mario Klingemann’s works, illustrate the evolving debate. Future copyright laws must adapt to encompass AI-generated art, potentially through new types of copyright and specific licenses. Ethical considerations are also paramount, necessitating guidelines that balance human creativity with the contributions of AI, ensuring fair use and consent in the creation process.