Empowering AI Ethics: Code Copyright in the AI Era

Home » The DATA Framework » Empowering AI Ethics: Code Copyright in the AI Era

Introduction: The Rise of AI and Intellectual Property Challenges

The increasing prevalence of artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming various sectors of our society, raising critical questions about intellectual property rights and code copyright laws. With AI-generated content becoming more commonplace, we need to examine the implications of landmark cases like Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc. [1] and explore how the traditional copyright framework can be adapted to accommodate the evolving AI landscape. In this article, we will discuss code copyright in the AI era through the lens of AI Empower’s DATA framework, which addresses diversity and inclusion, accountability, transparency, and accessibility/protection.

Diversity and Inclusion in AI-generated Content

AI-generated content has the potential to democratize creativity, but it also poses challenges in ensuring diverse voices and perspectives are protected and acknowledged [2]. To address this, code copyright laws must evolve to consider the rights of both AI developers and the creators whose works might be integrated or transformed by AI [3]. Moreover, fostering collaboration between industry stakeholders, policymakers, and creators is essential to develop an inclusive framework for AI-generated content [4].

Accountability for AI-generated Works

As AI-generated content blurs the lines between human and machine authorship, accountability becomes an essential aspect of copyright laws [5]. Legal frameworks must establish clear guidelines for AI developers and users, holding them responsible for the content they create and share. Additionally, policies should address potential infringement scenarios and consider how to assign liability between AI systems and their developers or users [6].

Transparency in AI-generated content is crucial to establish trust and ensure ethical use [7]. Code copyright laws should encourage transparency by promoting open-source models and clear attribution for AI-generated works. This approach can help users understand the origins of content, identify potential biases, and ensure proper credit is given to the original creators [8].

Accessibility and Protection of AI-generated Content

Balancing accessibility with protection is key to fostering innovation in AI-generated content. Code copyright laws must strike a balance between protecting intellectual property rights and allowing broader dissemination of AI-generated works [9]. By reevaluating licensing models, policies can facilitate greater access to AI-generated content while still respecting the rights of creators and developers [10].

As AI-generated content continues to expand, it is imperative that code copyright laws evolve to address the unique challenges it presents. By leveraging AI Empower’s DATA framework and embracing diversity, accountability, transparency, and accessibility/protection, we can shape a more ethical and inclusive future for AI-generated content.

References

[1] Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 804 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2015).

[2] Searle, S. (2020). AI and IP: Who owns the copyright to AI-generated works? Intellectual Property Magazine.

[3] Bridy, A. (2016). Coding Creativity: Copyright and the Artificially Intelligent Author. Stanford Technology Law Review, 5.

[4] Van Eechoud, M. (2020). Licensing AI-generated content: Challenges and opportunities. SCRIPTed, 17(2).

[5] Abbott, R. (2018). Allocating liability for computer-generated torts. South Carolina Law Review, 69(2).

[6] Gervais, D. (2019). Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property: An Interview with Daniel Gervais. Intellectual Property Watch.

[7] Wirtz, B. W., et al. (2018). Transparency in the age of algorithmic management: A systematic literature review. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 60(3), 221-244. doi: 10.1007/s12599-018-0534-4

[8] Van Eechoud, M. (2020). Licensing AI-generated content: Challenges and opportunities. SCRIPTed, 17(2).

[9] Searle, S. (2020). AI and IP: Who owns the copyright to AI-generated works? Intellectual Property Magazine.

[10] Van Eechoud, M. (2020). Licensing AI-generated content: Challenges and opportunities. SCRIPTed, 17(2).

Additional references considered when formulating the article, but not directly referenced in Article:

[11] Caliskan, A., Bryson, J. J., & Narayanan, A. (2017). Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases. Science, 356(6334), 183-186. doi: 10.1126/science.aal4230

[12] Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency – FAT* ’18, 77-91. doi: 10.1145/3178876.3186044

[13] Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 1-21. doi: 10.1177/2053951716679679

[14] Floridi, L. (2019). Understanding artificial intelligence ethics and safety: A guide for the responsible design and implementation of AI systems in the public sector. European Commission Joint Research Centre.

[15] Yoo, J., & Alavi, M. (2014). Media and group collaboration: The effect of information accessibility on group performance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31(3), 117-148. doi: 10.1080/07421222.2014.971090

Transparency in Research and making it Accessible

[1] Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc., a landmark case in code copyright law, dealt with the legality of Google Books, a project that scanned millions of copyrighted books and made their text searchable. The court ruled in favor of Google, stating that the project constituted fair use. This case illustrates the complexities of adapting traditional copyright laws to accommodate AI-generated content.

[2] Searle (2020) explores the challenges of determining copyright ownership for AI-generated works, highlighting the importance of reevaluating code copyright laws to ensure diverse voices and perspectives are protected and acknowledged.

[3] Bridy (2016) discusses the implications of AI-generated content on creativity and copyright, emphasizing the need for code copyright laws to evolve and consider the rights of both AI developers and creators whose works might be integrated or transformed by AI.

[4] Van Eechoud (2020) identifies challenges and opportunities in licensing AI-generated content, advocating for collaboration between industry stakeholders, policymakers, and creators to develop an inclusive framework for AI-generated content.

[5] Abbott (2018) examines the allocation of liability for computer-generated torts, which is relevant to the discussion of accountability in AI-generated works. The article underscores the necessity for legal frameworks to establish clear guidelines and assign liability between AI systems, their developers, and users.

[6] Gervais (2019) provides insights into the intersection of AI and intellectual property, emphasizing the need for policies that address potential infringement scenarios and liability.

[7] Wirtz et al. (2018) conducted a systematic literature review on transparency in the age of algorithmic management, emphasizing the importance of transparency in AI-generated content to establish trust and ensure ethical use.

[8] Van Eechoud (2020) discusses the balance between protecting intellectual property rights and allowing broader dissemination of AI-generated works, suggesting that reevaluating licensing models can facilitate greater access while still respecting creators’ rights.

[9] Searle (2020) raises questions about the ownership of copyright to AI-generated works, highlighting the importance of striking a balance between protecting intellectual property rights and allowing broader dissemination of AI-generated works.

[10] Van Eechoud (2020) explores the challenges and opportunities in licensing AI-generated content, emphasizing the importance of reevaluating licensing models to facilitate greater access while still respecting creators’ rights.

Additional references considered in the article provide insights into AI ethics, biases in AI systems, intersectional accuracy disparities, and the effect of information accessibility on group performance [11-15]. These references help to inform the broader context of AI ethics and the DATA framework, although they may not be directly cited within the article.


Home » The DATA Framework » Empowering AI Ethics: Code Copyright in the AI Era