a post by Daniel Gervais (Institute for Information Law (IViR) for the Kluwer Copyright Blog
Using newer forms of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including General Adversarial Networks (GANs), AI machines are increasingly good at emulating humans and laying siege to what has been a strictly human outpost: intellectual creativity. AI machines have composed polyphonic baroque music bearing the “style” of J.S. Bach. “Robot reporters” routinely write news bulletins and sports reports, a process called “automated journalism.” Machines write poems and draft contracts. A machine named e-David produces paintings using a complex visual optimization algorithm that “takes pictures with its camera and draws original paintings from these photographs.” Machines can even write or enhance their own code.
At this juncture, we cannot know with certainty how high on the creativity ladder machines will reach when compared to or measured against their human counterparts, but we do know this: They are far enough already to force us to ask a genuinely hard and complex question, one that intellectual property (IP) scholars and courts will need to answer soon, namely whether copyrights should be granted to productions made not by humans, but by machines. This question is the subject of my forthcoming article, the key points of which are discussed in this post.
Continue reading
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment