2023-10-03 22:01:18
On September 12, a new bill aimed at regulating artificial intelligence (AI) through copyright was tabled by eight deputies, supported in particular by Guillaume Vuilletet (Proposal No. 1630 aimed at regulating artificial intelligence through copyright). The text aims to “complete” the intellectual property code to offer better protection and remuneration to artists. The philosophy behind this proposed law is to protect artists in the face of the development of artificial intelligence, which is disrupting the traditional art market. Indeed, it is argued by many artists and unions that the development of generative artificial intelligence systems in particular has disrupted their economic model (v. on this subject, S. Le Cam and F. Maupomé, An argument for better regulation of AI, II. Economic impacts, p. 15).
To do this, the proposal aims to better protect artists and ensure better remuneration for their work, particularly when the works generated might have been generated thanks to the work of artists on which the AI would have been trained. This proposal is in line with the “humanist principle which governs French copyright” and aims to “encourage AI systems to respect copyright and promote creation, thus strengthening the ‘French cultural exception’. If the intention of the deputies is laudable, the bill is currently marked by certain defects which make it inapplicable to technologies such as AI systems.
Contributions of the bill
The bill has four articles.
Article 1 proposes to supplement Article L. 131-3 of the Intellectual Property Code with a paragraph providing that “the integration by artificial intelligence software of intellectual works protected by copyright law author in his system and from a stronger their exploitation is subject to the general provisions of this code and therefore to the authorization of the authors or rights holders.”
Article 2 raises several points. First of all, it proposes to supplement article L. 321-2 of the intellectual property code to specify the ownership of rights to works generated by an AI system without direct human intervention. In this situation, the ownership of the rights belongs to the “authors or rights holders of the works who made it possible to design said artificial work”.
Also, it proposes to provide for the management of rights to works generated by AI by authors’ societies or other collective management organizations.
Article 3 would modify article L. 121-2 of the intellectual property code by adding a paragraph creating a labeling system, requiring the label “work generated by AI” to be affixed to works generated by an AI system, as well as…
1696374816
#Proposed #law #aiming #regulate #artificial #intelligence #copyright #laudable #perfectible #initiative #Artificial #intelligence
