Patents AND Copyrights Offices Should Formulate Some Rules On Inventions OR Literary OR Dramatic Works Generated By AI, That Are Filed By Individuals / Companies As Inventors OR Authors!

 

I am not against the AI generated work. I am merely against who should be considered as the Original Proprietor / Author / Inventor of the work generated by AI! So far, there’re no guidelines whatsoever have been issued by the concerned offices, that if the work is generated by AI, then, the Author or the Inventor or the Applicant or the Owner, shall submit an UNDERTAKING clearly mentioning that they are merely the Owners or Applicants of the AI generated work, and not the Authors or Inventors; and then, such applications should be Accepted on “AS IS” basis work, clearly writing the same details.

In my previous blog recently I published, in which I clearly mentioned that there are certain countries who consider even the Companies as Authors, which then dilutes the definition of the Natural Persons. YET, there’s still no provision that has been implemented, to at least take from these Authors or Inventors who submitted an AI generated work as Original Work, stating that they need to be registered as the Owners or Applicants of the work, and not as Authors or Inventors; despite of the fact that the rules presently only accept the applications wherein the Author or Inventor should be the Natural Person. For such reasons only, I’ve already written myriad blogs as why the AI should be considered now as the Natural Person.  

FUN FACT:

1.        Ethically & Technically, you shouldn’t be considered as Author being a Natural Person, IF, AI has generated your literary or dramatic work;

2.        Ethically & Technically, you shouldn’t be considered as the Inventor of any product or process or composition being a Natural Person, IF, AI has generated all the formulations or codes for you.

There’s a difference between taking additional clerical help from AI to then you being considered as an Author or Inventor under the ambit of Natural Person; rather letting AI generating your entire work, and you end up taking all the credits. Exploiting the rule that, AI still, in almost all Nations is NOT considered as Natural Person.

ANOTHER FUN FACT:

Despite AI being of the Non-Deterministic nature, one can notice that, it now almost all the times, generate, if not the same, but similar contents. Thus, what you will do in the case, if an act of infringement is raised against you w.r.t. that similar or closely related work that you claimed authorship or inventorship of, but generated by AI? Because, after all, AI has learnt mostly from the pirated DATA, stolen from the WEB by the pirates!

Conclusion: Use AI for the purpose of personal or R&D related work only; and when it comes to owning the Authorship or the Inventorship of the same by you being the Natural Person, then,  don’t exploit these existing laws and rules wherein AI is not being considered as Author or Inventor merely for the fact that it ain’t a Natural Person. And the concerned Patents and Copyrights Offices must take cognizance of the above issues; because, now, everyone is an Author or Inventor of an original work or invention; despite not being the same!

Am I missing something? 😊

© Pranav Chaturvedi