Introduction
We are living in 21st century, as we all know this is the time of technology. We can also say that we are living in the era Artificial Intelligence (AI). We cannot deny that we are progressing in all the horizon of innovation and development, but telling this will not be wrong we are progressing in the field of technology and AI very exponentially. AI is helping us in every sphere of the life in all manners and one of those use is to create our ideas. We are taking help of AI to create our content, to make it more specific, more useful, very much effective in every manner. While creating the contents with help of Artificial Intelligence (AI) the question of authorship arises. AI generates the contents with the help of data stored in it and according to the programing has been done. The question is who will be the original author of the content generated by with the help of Artificial Intelligence (AI) under the provision of Copy Right Act, of India. According to the Copy Right Act OF India, 1957, only the natural person can be the real Author of any creation.
The challenges in defining the authorship of contents generated by AI.
The most confusing and critical question in the Copy Right Act, 1957, regarding the contents created by the AI is relating to the authorship of contents, who will take the responsibility of the contents created with the help of AI, what are the negative and positive consequences of the contents created by the AI. When we talk about the old way of creating contents, in this manner the creator of any content creates his/her contents with the sole creativity of himself/herself without taking help of AI. The creator in the traditional way of creating any creation or masterpiece remain natural person. While we take the help of AI tools to create our contents to make the creation more specific and more affective, the AI tools help us according to the algorithm programed for AI and the data stored by programmer into the AI to function. When we start taking help of AI to generate contents the AI start according to the programing and give the information related to our question or queries from the data stored in it by the programmer. As we talk about the authorship that means the creator has the control upon his creation while taking help of AI tools to generate the contents the author has to totally depend upon the programing and algorithm and data installed in AI. The natural persons are using AI as per their need ant get the results accordingly that’s where the question of Authorship arises. In the year of 1994, Section 2(d)(v) introduced or added in the Act. According to the new Section 2(d)(v) of the Act, the computer generated work has given the validity of authorship but the natural person who is generating or creating the contents with the help of AI tools will be the author of the contents and will be accountable and take the responsibility of the contents.
Opportunities in the AI generated Contents
In today’s time as we all know people are getting help of AI tools to improve their work and AI has been proved an authenticate and reliable tools and helping hands in creating the varieties of work and arts. Lawyers are using AI in making their legal deeds more specific and very much affective and those works are accepted by the professionals and systems. Tutors are taking help of AI to gather relevant information with the subject fields to tech and enhance their career also to make it easy to elaborate to the students. AI has the capacity to generate millions of information in very short duration of time and the information are very authentic ad the people can rely upon them, AI has extend the horizon of information.
The legal perspective of AI generated contents.
As per the need of the time, the most important thing is to set the legal framework of AI generated contents to save the copy right issue of the contents. The authorship, accountability, responsibility should come under the domain of this legal frame work. There must be ethnicity in generating the contents with the help of AI, and one should take the responsibility of the contents and the program should not be biased.
Related cases
1. In the recent case of CBSE claiming the right of authorship of question papers generated by the AI, The Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that the authorship can only be claimed and attributed only to the natural person. The authorship cannot be claimed without the involvement of natural person.
2. In the case of Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India, the Hon’ble Court held that using generative AI to portray famous personality in fictional scenarios violates their personality rights.
According to the Section 52 of the Copy Right Act, 1957.
Certain acts shall not constitute an infringement of copy right
(a) A fair dealing with ay work, not being a computer program, for the purpose of-
(i) Private or personal use , including research;
(ii) Criticism or review, whether of that work or any other work;
(iii) The reporting of current events and current affairs, including the reporting of lecture delivered in public, etc.
Conclusion
In India the authorship of the arts and any kind of work is dealt under the Copy Right Act, 1957. According to the act the authorship will be given only to natural person and if the creation has been created with the help of computer the authorship should be given only if the involvement of natural person is there and in such circumstances the authorship will be given to the natural person who has created the contents with the help of computer.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best family law firm, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm. Best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by: Aamir Hussain.
