Here the Post examines the town’s place on how copyright involving AI-generated work needs to be protected.

1. Are AI-generated works protected by present legislation?

The authorities stated the Copyright Ordinance is able to defending AI-generated work and that the current provisions needs to be maintained.

The session paper stated there have been two issues linked to the appliance of the ordinance on AI-generated works, nevertheless it didn’t discover it essential to make substantial amendments to the current framework.

The first drawback was how computer-generated work fitted into the originality requirement due to the shortage of clear authorized precedent.

But the federal government stated resolutions needs to be formed by developments in case legislation, which might enable for a versatile interpretation that might be tailored to technological development and modifications in inventive processes.

Another query that might come up is authorship and possession of computer-generated works.

The writer might be the developer, programmer, coach of the AI fashions, system operator, or the customers who enter prompts to create the works.

But the federal government stated resolutions needs to be “fact-specific, to be determined on a case-by-case basis” and that there was no onerous and quick rule.

It added that contractual preparations might present a practical market answer on the query of which occasion ended up holding the copyright on AI-generated works.

Hong Kong needs to strengthen copyright legislation to assist shield AI improvement and promote the town as a regional centre for mental property buying and selling. Photo: Reuters

2. How are copyright infringements arising from AI-generated works tackled?

The legal responsibility situation of copyright infringements involving AI-generated works is topic to inquiry into the info and supporting proof on a case-by-case foundation underneath the present authorized framework.

The authorities stated inflexible guidelines that assigned infringement legal responsibility to particular people, resembling house owners or finish customers, throughout the board might fail to account for the distinctive factual context of every case and compromise equity.

“Any arbitrary imposition of excessive onus on AI system owners or users, without due regard to the circumstances of individual cases, will likely hinder AI technology development and undermine efforts to encourage its use,” the doc stated.

The authorities add the current authorized framework was broad sufficient to sort out infringement instances, and the prevailing market apply of utilizing contractual agreements to deal with legal responsibility issues was a sensible strategy.

3. Why are particular copyright exceptions wanted?

Developing, coaching or enhancing an AI mannequin utilizing others’ copyright works might represent copyright infringement underneath current laws until a licence is obtained from the copyright proprietor or the motion falls throughout the copyright exceptions outlined within the ordinance.

But every exception is confined to sure particular conditions or functions, resembling analysis, personal research and training, and topic to circumstances.

There is not any exception for the needs of computational information evaluation and processing, the prevalence of which is growing in AI know-how improvement.

The authorities proposed a “text and data mining exception”, which might enable using copyrighted work for standard textual content and information mining, computational evaluation and processing to spice up the efficiency of a pc program.

It additionally urged that the exception might be relevant to business and non-commercial actions, resembling the event of AI fashions for business use and enterprise analytics.

But, to stability the curiosity of copyright house owners, the paper urged they might be supplied an opt-out clause to stop their works from getting used.

The bureau added restrictions might be imposed on the distribution of a duplicate made underneath the exception.

Several jurisdictions, together with the European Union, Japan, Singapore and the UK have launched particular copyright exceptions for related actions by means of their very own legal guidelines, though the scope and circumstances fluctuate.

4. What about deepfakes?

The unauthorised use or imitation of a person, by means of using a likeness or voice, don’t essentially represent infringement as a result of they aren’t protected by copyright within the first place.

But the federal government nonetheless included the topic within the doc and highlighted its significance to understanding the broader implications of generative AI.

It stated that authorized cures had been already out there to sort out the misuse of a person’s private traits by means of deepfakes.

When deep faux content material additionally includes the unauthorised use of a piece in copyright, authorized motion could be taken primarily based on infringement of the creator’s rights.

Some non-intellectual property legal guidelines can also be relevant, resembling the non-public information safety laws, the legislation of defamation and publication of intimate photos.

Source link