Who owns the rights to a work generated by artificial intelligence (AI)?

With the advances in AI, the ownership of rights in a work generated by artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming unclear.

The rise of generative artificial intelligence is revolutionising content creation, whether text, images, video, or musical works and software. Thanks to advanced models such as GPT, DALL·E, or Stable Diffusion, AI can produce works in a matter of seconds, thereby blurring the lines between human creation and automation.

This subject is crucial because current legislation is not harmonised, giving rise to legal uncertainty. Courts are beginning to rule on the recognition of copyright in works produced by AI, with decisions that are sometimes contradictory. Businesses and creators must adapt their strategies to protect their rights and comply with the applicable regulations.

For example, in 2023, the U.S. Copyright Office refused to grant protection to an image generated by AI, explaining that only a work created by a human could be protected. This position is, however, contested in several countries.

Generative artificial intelligence relies on machine-learning models capable of producing original content from an existing dataset. This technology is used in various fields: automated writing, artistic and musical creation, and software development. These advances call into question the classic principles of rights ownership in intellectual property.

To be assisted by an artificial intelligence law lawyer

The lack of legal personality of AI: an obstacle to the recognition of rights

Under intellectual property law, a creation is protected by copyright provided that it is original and results from human intellectual effort. However, generative AI does not have legal personality, which prevents it, under the current state of the law, from being recognised as an author.

Positions vary from one jurisdiction to another. The European Union and the United States consider that copyright protects only human creations. The United Kingdom, by contrast, recognises that works generated by AI are created under the supervision of a human.

Let's discuss your needs for 15 minutes!

Legal and economic stakes for creators and businesses

The development of generative AI raises two major concerns:

• Human creators fear that their works may be used to train AI without compensation or recognition.
• Businesses must ensure that AI-generated content does not infringe pre-existing rights, on pain of legal proceedings.

Early court decisions and positions of intellectual property offices

With the increase in disputes, several court decisions have clarified the application of copyright to AI-generated creations.

• In 2023, the U.S. Copyright Office rejected an application for protection of a work entirely generated by AI, while agreeing to protect creations involving significant human intervention.
• In Japan (2024), a decision held that a work generated by AI may be protected if a human directed and selected the final result.
• In the European Union, the AI Act provides for transparency obligations for generative AI, without settling the question of copyright.

Ownership of AI-generated works: who holds the rights?

Only a human being can be regarded as the author of a work under the current legal framework. A creation arising purely from an AI model is not eligible for copyright protection. By contrast, where a human uses AI as a tool and steers the creation, they may claim such protection.

For example, a photographer using AI to retouch an image retains their copyright if their intervention remains decisive.

Consequently, businesses and creators must adapt to this uncertain legal framework. Strong human intervention increases the chances of obtaining protection. It is also advisable to formalise the allocation of rights by contract and to anticipate disputes, because the same AI-generated content may be used by several persons, making the enforcement of exclusive rights more complex.

I want reliable legal documents!

The training of AI models and respect for copyright

Generative AI models rely on vast datasets, which may include works protected by copyright. The use of such content must comply with statutory exceptions, such as text and data mining (text and data mining). However, rights holders have a right to object (opt-out) to prevent the exploitation of their works.

Mitigation measures and contractual safeguards

Businesses using generative AI tools must guarantee:

• Greater transparency regarding the use of data.
• Precise contractual clauses to govern liability in the event of copyright infringement.
• Enhanced control over the protected content exploited by AI models.

The rise of generative AI poses major legal challenges in terms of copyright. While current legislation favours human creators, debate remains open as to the necessary evolution of the legal framework. Adapting regulations, clarifying liabilities, and framing contractual practices will be essential in reconciling innovation with the protection of rights. As generative AI advances, a balance between creation and respect for copyright becomes imperative.