ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot that can provide answers to inquiries by leveraging the answers from the large collections of data it is exposed to. Its advanced capabilities have raised questions about the copyright of the content it produces. In the UK, copyright of computer-generated works is defined in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, where content not created by a human author is considered to be protected by copyright. However, tracing the original sources of AI-generated content, as well as discovering copyright infringement, can be difficult.
Thus, the question of who can use the original content and if the AI itself should be credited as the author of creative outputs arises. In the case of ChatGPT, the company, OpenAI, provides users with all rights, title, and interest in the output with their terms of use; however, they note that they are not responsible for any legal violations users may commit. Laws and policies must be clarified if organizations are able to use AI-generated content without copyright issues.
Relating to the question whether only humans can be credited as the authors of AI-generated content or if the AI itself can be considered an author, UK law currently does not permit AI to possess any copyright. Furthermore, the UK government has not expressed any interest in changing this stance. Still, AI is discussing the possibility of their AI creators being recognized as the owners of the output, which would greatly affect the way business is done in the future.
Microsoft has already taken advantage of this by embedding a ChatGPT powered product, Copilot, into their software. Embedding AI into products and services can deliver greater efficiency in operations, yet looking to the future, it is important to consider the implications of a future in which copyright law shifts its focus away from human creativity to that of AI. Such a shift would have a profound impact on the value of innovation, potentially creating a dangerous situation of concentrated corporate power.
This has been exemplified in the UK government’s response to the AI consultation, in which two conflicting views emerged; the tech sector suggesting the rights to AI-generated content should lie with users, whereas the creative sector preferring none at all. For now, these two groups remain in discussion, and should a revolutionary change be agreed upon, it is likely that a system of open innovation with IPR being recognized for contributions to the works generated by AI systems will be put in place.
