What unintended consequences could arise if generative AI technology is allowed to be used without copyright protection?

Generative AI is a type of artificial intelligence that can create new content from existing data. It has been used to generate new music, artwork, and even entire movies. A major copyright lawsuit is currently underway that could shape the future of generative AI and how it is used by creators and consumers alike. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for the creative industries.

In the increasingly digital-focused world of today, artificial intelligence (AI) development has grown exponentially, navigating an active legal landscape as it continues to evolve. Previous regulatory guidelines have already been established on discussions of machine-created works, but a legal showdown of sorts could be on the horizon to further shape the development of AI-generated works.

In this potential case, musician Raisa Maudit has sited law firm Agence Christian Meudec for copyright infringement, alleging that one of the company’s clients had obtained three of her musical compositions back in 2018 without permission. Agence Christian Meudec found the works among several thousand random musical pieces generated by an AI program designed by Sony.

The centerpiece of this legal battle lies in the interpretation of the works’ copyright. Had the pieces merely been randomly copied or plagiarized, the case could be easily addressed, however Agence Christian Meudec believes that since the AI’s output was simply a reaction to instigated criteria, the compositions carry no creative authorship, thus nullifying the need for copyright.

Though both arguments appear to have valid points, the potential results of this case are not limited to that of the copying dispute at hand. If Agence Christian Meudec's argument holds true, then this opens up the potential for certain types of generative AI to become more ubiquitous in the world. While machines have already experienced noteworthy success in artistic endeavors, this potential case could further demonstrate the potential of machines to create unique, yet tangled works of media.

The court’s decision in this matter could certainly have wide ranging implications, affecting business models and the general public’s understanding of artificial intelligence’s impact. In the meantime, the court’s decision carries a weighty message, regardless of interpretation: the current copyright laws may no longer be sufficient to properly address the questions that modern technology has brought to the forefront. It’s likely that the court’s decision will clarify to what degree AI-generated works are protected by current laws. Regardless of how this case plays out, its consequences could lead to a brighter, more informed future for AI.

Join The Conversation!