Ownership of ideas is not an easy subject on a good day. Throw the issue of AIs into the mix, and you get a very volatile situation.

There is no universal answer to who owns the rights to the content generated by AI systems. The issue is complex and evolving. Finding a fair solution that satisfies everyone involved is going to be a challenge.

This article takes a very US-centric approach of the issue  for good reason. All the big players are in the United States. The authorities here are in the best position to create regulation that actually impacts the AI industry. They can better dictate how companies like OpenAI or MidJourney train their models, which is probably the hottest skillet on the stove.

The Setup

There are three key players involved in the AI copyright debate:

• the genius AI developers;
• the unsung artists whose work was used to train AIs;
• the users of AI platforms.

Each of them has a stake in the copyright conversation.

AI developers actually love the idea of giving up copyright to their users. It beats giving it to the artists whose work has been used to train the model. Many popular platforms' Terms of Service allow users to do whatever they want with the art generated by AI, including using it for profit. But here's the catch: these developers might be offering users something they don't fully own.

Those amazing AI models we all marvel at were actually trained on the work of unwilling creators and other commercial platforms. Even when using works in the public domain, it gets complicated. These creators never anticipated that their work would be used to train AI models that could potentially replace them in the workforce.

This is the heart of the matter. AIs are taking the jobs of the very creators who trained them. It's a very emotional debate for everyone involved. These are vocational jobs—careers that take time to build and are labors of love.

Who Gets Copyright Over the AI-Generated Content At The Moment?

This is a hot topic up for debate in the U.S. Copyright Office. CAI-generated works are currently not covered by copyright since they lack "original and creative authorship by a human author." The Copyright Office views the input given to AI as merely a brief or guide, similar to what clients give artists. Just as a brief doesn't hold enough weight for authorship, neither does the prompt given to AI.

AI platform proponents argue that copyright law protects works created by humans with the use of the software. AI is on a whole new level. It's stronger, faster, and much more powerful than any other tool creators have used before. Whoever wants copyright protection for AI-generated works must be able to demonstrate that they had a significant part in the development, beyond just writing prompts.

In the United States, the person who pays for or creates an AI tool generally owns copyrightable works created by such a tool. Those you pay to develop an AI software for you would be the legal owners of any content produced by the program. However, this may not apply to all types of AI systems, especially those that produce original and creative works by themselves. In that case, the U.S. Since "original and creative authorship by a human author" is required for copyright protection, the U.S. Copyright Office has ruled that AI-generated works is out of scope.

How Can Content Owners Protect and Enforce Their Rights Against AI-Generated Work?

Content owners may face challenges in identifying and proving infringement by AI-generated works, especially if they are distributed online or anonymously. They may also face difficulties in enforcing their rights against foreign jurisdictions or platforms that have different legal standards or policies. The fact that platforms like OpenAI do not disclose their data sets only complicates the issue.

Many of the artists simply didn’t go through the process of copyrighting their works before the recent developments. This will make it even more difficult to argue for ownership in a court of law. In the current climate, artists can’t do much beyond the class lawsuits that are being analyzed right now.

The copyright breach is blatant. The platforms themselves are instructing users to reference the work of (often unwilling) artists when they generate their own pictures. "Imagine art in the style of so-and-so" is one of the many prompt examples that feels like a slap in the face of creators. AIs will replicate their work in a matter of seconds, for a fraction of the price that an artist would charge.

Solutions Need To Come From Regulators

Regulators play an important role in creating a solid legal foundation. This framework should safeguard and respect artists' intellectual property rights. By setting transparent rules, regulators can foster innovation and address the obstacles that come with AI.

Clear Attribution Guidelines: Create straightforward rules for crediting original artists whenever AI creations are used publicly.

Collaborative Licensing Agreements: Develop licensing frameworks that allow artists to collaborate with AI developers, making sure both parties are fairly compensated.

Creative Commons Integration and AI-generated Royalties: Enable artists to specify how their artwork can be used in AI training by integrating Creative Commons licenses into AI platforms. Ensure artists receive a cut of the revenue generated by AI systems that use their work as inspiration.

Blockchain-based Copyright Protection: Use blockchain technology to establish secure and transparent records of copyright ownership and usage rights. This solution would give artists greater control and protection over their work.

Artist Guilds and Collectives: Support the formation of artist guilds and collectives that advocate for artist rights in AI contexts, negotiating fair agreements with developers.

Publicly Accessible AI Datasets: Encourage the creation of publicly available AI training datasets that feature diverse artwork with explicit permissions from artists, ensuring compliance with copyright laws.

Standardized Fair Use Guidelines: Create standardized guidelines for fair use of artwork in AI models, setting limitations on usage without explicit permission or compensation.

Ethical AI Certification: Establish an independent certification body that evaluates and rewards AI systems following ethical practices, including proper attribution and compensation for artists.

In Closing

The intricate dance between AI systems and human creativity presents both exciting possibilities and potential pitfalls. While solutions like artist opt-outs and fair compensation lay a solid foundation, ongoing discussions and adaptable regulations are key. By nurturing an environment of collaboration between artists and AI developers, we can unlock the full potential of this amalgamation. No matter how you put it, this is a creative revolution. Revolutions oftentimes have collateral victims. It’s up to regulators to make sure that doesn’t happen.