COPYRIGHT IN A DIGITAL AGE

Copyright in a Digital Age

Copyrights Rise from the Dead:

Registering Copyright in Generative A.I 💡⭐️

This is talented New York based artist Kris Kristova. I advised her in early November on the principal issues relating to Copyright and Intellectual Property in her excellent graphic novel publication “Zarya of the Dawn”.

Kris is now Head of AI Product for Mini Studo in New York and like other graphic novelists she wrote the story, the characters and designed the artwork. The graphic art was made predominantly with midjourney, an AI engine.

Last week the US copyright agency ruled that Kris could register her copyright in the work, and is entitled to copyright for the parts of the book she wrote and arranged, but not for the images produced by Midjourney.

When Kris approached me for legal advice in relation to the intellectual property within her work the following issues were discussed in terms of the art work, in which all creators using A.I tools can learn from:

⭐️💡The main character of Zarya, is based on the famous actor Zendaya (pictured insert below).

Use of an image of an individual in any art work may require clearance including with A.I. Despite being created with an A.I tool, individuals, actors and artists will still retain the legal right to their own image.

A clearance should be obtained, else an individual could sue for damages. Noting within this past week “Harry and Meghan” whilst not named, have been referred to in the animation series “South Park”. Whilst a parody the unauthorised use of an individual's image can be considered a breach of their copyright.

⭐️💡Uses of others image within art work, may be claimed if small samples are used. In the US Fair Use may be permit limited use of copyrighted material without first acquiring direct permission from the copyright holder. If a copyright holder asserts infringement against a user, that user may be able to assert Fair Use as a defence.

⭐️💡In the US Art can be copyrighted but the latest decision by the US copyright agency specifically excludes the use of A.I tools, even though there is a human operator. This may be prohibitive to creators using A.I tools, as it excludes them from the creative process. By comparison in Australia copyright is considered automatic upon creation, although it’s unclear whether this will now vest in the creator who uses AI tools.

The US limits an artists recognition of A.I art in Copyright. What is key is to ensure that the overall creation be assigned as Copyright, thereby allowing artists and entrepreneurs to financially gain from the things they create, with A.I or otherwise.

But for now the ruling endorses Kris and others rights in copyright giving them a right to earn a living from what they create.

This has since the invention of copyright with the statue of Anne 1710 been the purpose of copyright, and the use of A.I tools should be applied no differently to talented artists, like Kris.