Legislation for AI systems

“I think the future is closer than the expected”, this is an interesting statement and makes me think again, at the pace AI has advanced, the copyright laws and regulations have failed to match up their speed and are far lagging behind. Naruto and Slater’s case is a perfect example of that. Logically speaking we are still a bit far away from the time where robots might overtake us, and the AI systems are completely operated by themselves (David, 2018). But that brings us to another dilemma, do the readers think it is ever possible for the AI machines to imbibe an intent or self-awareness? Creative work is an end result of these attributes.

A peer mentioned the identification of “personhood” and “liabilities”, do you think it is also important to assess the intent behind the creation? Whether its beneficial for the private corporations only or does it favour public interest as well (David, 2018)? Apart from that one also needs to assess the spectrum of human intervention in the creation of artistic work. As McLaughin (2018) categorizes the effort into computer-assisted, pure human generated and pure computer generated. Do you think it will be complicated or straightforward to classify that because there is already an endless debate that although Slater had set up the equipment but it was Naruto who pushed the button?




Davis, D. (2018) How AI and copyright would work. Available at: https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/09/how-ai-and-copyright-would-work/ (Accessed: 7 February 2018)


McLaughlin, M. (2018) Computer-Generated Inventions. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3097822 (Accessed: 7 February 2018)


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *