Artificial intelligence has been experiencing rapid development in recent times and is slowly starting to be used to generate, for example, marketing content, whether text or graphics. It is widely available and easy to use – just enter a few keywords.
What does the law say about this?
However, the Copyright Act is clear on this and stipulates female database that the author is the natural person who created the work .
What does common sense say about this?
If you ask an artificial intelligence to create a Picasso-style painting of Sophocles and Genghis Khan playing table tennis, it will certainly generate it for you without any questions. The idea of a specific image is the result of your creative activity, even if you have left its implementation to the artificial intelligence. However, by generating the image that you have asked the artificial intelligence to create, “something” has been created. There are three possibilities in total.
The author of the work is artificial intelligence. This is probably why eco-friendly compostable platters are revolutionizing sustainable dining the most logical conclusion, since we must admit that it did most of the work by generating the image. However, artificial intelligence is a thing, and even if we ignore the fact that it cannot be an author by law, we come to the conclusion that authorship would probably be of no use to it, because it would not be able to exercise its rights.
The author of the work is the creator of the artificial intelligence. After all, he created the algorithm by which the artificial intelligence “thinks”, and in a way gave the artificial intelligence the limits within which it is able to process information and create independently. However, the vast majority of artificial intelligence works on the so-called black box principle, where the creator himself does not know exactly how the artificial intelligence makes decisions, so this construction of authorship is probably the weakest.
What does common about this?
The author of the work is the user of artificial thailand data intelligence. So, if the thing itself cannot be the copyright holder, the second in line in terms of creativity is clearly the user. Moreover, the use of artificial intelligence is usually subject to a fee for its creator, and the question is whether the user would be willing to pay the creator a fee with the understanding that he would have no rights to the resulting work, or that the rights would belong to the creator.
TipAccounts for legal entities and sole proprietors from ČSOB are free of management fees and without any conditions , including free contactless payment cards. Open a corporate and business account online in a few minutes.
What do the courts say about this?
It is perhaps understandable that – unless the legislation changes