The Shenzhen Nanshan District People’s Court, Court in Guangdong Province, in southern China, decided that intellectual productions carried out by an Artificial Intelligence (AI) program are entitled to copyright (holder who has the right to restrict \u201ccopying\u201d, reproduction , distribution, exhibition and preparing works derived, for a certain period of time, from a work that constituted their particular means of expression), stipulating that the infringer must be held civilly responsible for the unauthorized use of a work written by AI.<\/p>\n
The specific case involves a report indicating an increase in the Shanghai Index due to the telecommunications and oil extraction sectors, generated by AI software, which produces content automatically and replicated on the same date of its availability, without permission, by an online platform of the requested company, in a column on finance and stocks, which was legally required to indemnify the legal entity responsible for the creation of the AI \u200b\u200btechnology in an amount of approximately two hundred and sixteen dollars.<\/p>\n
The software, which has been running since 2015, according to information released by the company in the international press, is capable of producing 500,000 articles and 80 million words annually, so that only on November 15, 2018, 1298 news stories were written about the weather. , 773 in the area of \u200b\u200bfinance, 546 regarding automobiles, 126 dealing with real estate and 76 sports news. In addition, among its functionalities of intelligent writing are the writing of press releases, reports on economic sectors, error correction, summary, together with other skills, such as image processing and video production.<\/p>\n
The Chinese Court found that the requested company is civilly responsible for the use of the report, created with a unique format and content layout, showing originality characteristics, able, according to the decision, to fulfill the requirements of a written work, and is therefore , under the protection of copyright law, since the violation of these rights arose as soon as the work written by the AI \u200b\u200bwas used without obtaining prior permission, therefore, precedent was set in that jurisdiction that copyright law is more associated with originality, than authorship itself.<\/p>\n
This case about copyright in the production of AI software reaffirms the urgency in the debate about the legal, ethical and regulatory perspectives of technological solutions of this nature and of relations with interested parties, shedding light on the need for reflection on the definitions of \u201crights of the author \u201d(art. 1, Law n\u00ba 9.610 \/ 98) and\u201c intellectual works \u201das\u201c creations of the spirit \u201d(art. 7, caput, Law n\u00ba 9.The specific case involves a report indicating an increase in the Shanghai Index due to the telecommunications and oil extraction sectors.610 \/ 98), present in Brazilian legislation and the growth of AI solutions in the entertainment industry.<\/p>\n
By: Wilson Sales Belchior<\/p>\n
Source: ClickJus<\/p>\n