By Leonardo Neri

This is an important issue regarding the copyright protection of works produced by generative artificial intelligences (AIs), that is, those that create and not just identify information.

The situation varies across jurisdictions around the world. In the United States, the US Copyright Office has rejected copyright protection for AI-generated artwork on the grounds that “human authorship” is a necessary element for protection. 

In the United Kingdom and New Zealand, on the other hand, copyright protection is granted to computer-generated works, provided that a person coordinates or makes possible the creation of the work.

In Brazil, there are still no legal precedents on the subject, but the Copyright Law (LDA) emphasizes the figure of the human author to guarantee protection for “creations of the spirit”. This is evidenced by the protection not only of patrimonial rights, but also of “moral rights” related to the personality of the author.

The fundamental question is whether AI creation can be equated with human creativity. Some argue that legislation attributes the capacity for “creativity” exclusively to people, but there is debate about whether the ability to conceive a creation, even if not in a way that is identical to human minds, can be considered.

From a practical perspective, the lack of clear definition of ownership of AI-generated content poses a challenge. If protection requires a “human component,” AI-generated works could fall into the public domain, affecting companies that use AI to create content, such as music for games. 

This could have significant impacts on the AI market, which currently offers generative solutions in a variety of areas, such as gaming, journalism and music, where companies expect the generated content to be protected by copyright. However, the complexity and novelty of the topic make the current situation uncertain. Let’s wait for the enactment of new AI legislation, which is currently in Congress for approval.