Artificial Intelligence is a technological advancement in the modern world that is changing the framework of creativity especially in the fields of literary or dramatic work or in cinematographic work. AI in scriptwriting has surfaced questions in relation to authorship, ownership and copyright of AI generated scripts. Due to minimized human intervention in AI generated creativity, the copyright issues have started facing new challenges. Copyright principles trace the origin of the creation to the human involvement, the human labor as traced back amounts to the originality of the work, which is protected as the legal right of original creativity of an author. In traditional aspect human had the artistic mind who initiated or created the script, with recent developments AI related scripts call for the copyright issues to be curtailed with the emergence of AI in the modern world.
Issues In AI-generated Script With Respect To Copyright & Ownership
An assessment of ownership and copyright protection of AI generated script involves the analysis of element of originality and identification of author of the script generated. The foremost questions that arise in view of this are who is the author of the script generated and what is the originality of the script to get legal protection as copyright. Along with this, it is pertinent to discover whether AI is a co-writer, tool, or an independent creator.
Copyrightability & Authorship In AI-Generated Scripts
Originality as to the AI generated work is the most crucial concept to determine while granting copyright as the scripts shall be original and not copied. AI completely relies on the data fed to it and generate scripts as per the basis of an already existing data which often results in replication of pre-existing copyrighted work and infringing the pre copyrighted work. Rapid advancement of AI technologies often results in blurring the lines between original and AI-generated scripts which further imposes legal complexities. It gets challenging to determine whether the AI generated scripts meet the threshold of creativity to name it as original script.
The other problematic question that arises is to establish an author of the generated script. Section 2(d) of the Copyright Act 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) talks about the author in particular fields and considers first owner of the copyright as an owner, AI is facing tremendous challenges in respect of positioning itself as an author and pulling off the protections of copyright of the scripts generated as no legal personality is attributed to AI. The Act recognizes the person as an author who causes to create the computer-generated work subject to the person significantly playing a role in generation of the script. Positioning a user as the author of AI-generated content is challenging in practice, as it is difficult to determine authorship among multiple users who generate similar scripts using the same AI system. If a human makes substantial changes or additions to an AI generated creations, they may be able to claim copyright protection over the generated work. To ascertain the substantial human intervention can be perplexing, the insubstantial modifications to the generated script cannot be enough to satisfy the criteria of creativity to conclude it as an original script. It is quite blurry to understand the line between trivial modifications or substantial modifications which creates a room for misinterpretation for granting copyright and for initiating copyright infringement proceedings.
Is AI A Co-Writer, Tool, Or Independent Creator?
AI in scriptwriting has surfaced legal disputes over who owns the right to AI-generated creativity. Another attribute is to consider whether AI is a co-writer, a tool or an independent creator.
1. AI as a tool: AI is more often used as a tool to assist human authors in their scriptwriting. As a tool it assists in generating ideas, suggesting dialogues etc. In this capacity AI enhances the working of human author and does not replace human’s creativity. The generated content requires continuous human editing and creativity. Hence, since AI is merely engaged in assisting human writer, the user is generally considered as an author. Ownership is granted to human as they provide AI the required prompts and inputs.
2. AI as a co-writer: When AI makes a significant contribution in scriptwriting process, it is considered as co-writer. Considering AI as co-writer raises questions in respect of shared authorship and ownership. This is significantly dependent on human intervention in the final output.
3. AI as an independent creator: AI is often engaged in autonomously generating scripts, the legal status of these creations is unclear as current copyright laws require human authorship. This concept challenges the traditional notion of copyright ownership and authorship.
WGA (Writers Guild of America) Stance On AI-generated Content
Writers Guild of America is a labor union that represents professional writers for films, production etc. To be a member of WGA professionals who meet certain criteria are eligible. WGA takes a strong stand with respect to AI-generated scripts. WGA stands against the use of AI- generated scripts which replace the human creativity completely. WGA believes that writers should give complete ownership and full credit for their creativity. WGA further states that an AI can only be considered as a tool used for assisting humans in their creativity but cannot be a substitution for humans.
USA Perspective On AI-generated Work
United States Copyright Office has established that the AI generated output which contains substantiable human intervention are eligible for copyright protection. The U.S. Copyright office has taken a view that Copyrightability of the content depends on whether AI was an assisting instrument or if it has generated the output completely on its own. Copyright ownership depends on case-to-case basis and does not solely reject the ownership due to presence of AI in the work. U.S. Copyright Office follows the doctrine of “modicum of creativity” which states that only if the work has minimum degree of creativity, it is considered as original.
In the case of Thaler v. Perlmutter, Stephen Thaler sought copyright of his artwork wherein he stated “Creativity Machine” as the author of work which is an AI program developed by him. The U.S. office rejected his application on the ground that artwork lacks human authorship, which is a basic requirement. He made a second request for reconsideration which was also rejected by U.S. Copyright Office Review Board stating that the work meets copyright protection only if it is has substantial human intervention. Mr. Thaler appealed in U.S. District Court, Columbia which also upheld the previous rejections and stated that human authorship is the basic requirement for ownership of copyright.
Future Of Copyright & AI In Modern World
AI generated work provisions are not explicitly mentioned in the Act and still remains a gray area. This creates confusion and ambiguity in determining ownership and copyright eligibility and as of now the AI generated creativity remains non-copyrighted or copyright-free work. With the growth of use of AI in creativity field there is a need to reform the Copyright Act to include a specific right to copyright for AI generated work. The involvement of humans in directing AI through prompts, editing the output, and arranging the finished work implies a level of intellectual input that is consistent with the underlying principles of copyright law. In addition, while human authorship has been central in traditional copyright models, interpretations may change over time to allow for the evolving dynamics of creative production. Lawmakers could think in terms of a level of human intervention when deciding authorship, to make sure AI generated creativity does not lie entirely outside the perimeter of protection of ownership and copyright. Therefore, the legal battle for copyright and ownership is complex and evolving. Even though AI cannot own copyrights, human authors who contribute to AI generation may own copyright.
Authors: Riya Gupta & Aarushi Agarwal