THE AUTHOR IS DEAD. WHY A NEURAL NETWORK CANNOT BECOME A SUBJECT OF COPYRIGHT

Abstract

This article raises the growing problem of flooding the market with objects created not by man. As a result of the increasing use of artificial intelligence in order to generate new graphic and musical objects, there is a discussion about whether such objects should be considered objects of copyright. At this stage of the development of domestic copyright, this question remains unanswered. The authors, relying on scientific works, current legislation and judicial practice, aim to argue the position that the recognition of objects created by artificial intelligence as a work of science, literature and art, and its author himself is impractical. The authors come to their position through the study of the concept of creativity, associating it with goal-setting. Also, as an argument, the purpose of copyright is given as a set of norms designed primarily to protect human intellectual work. The article predicts the consequences of recognizing the authorship of artificial intelligence, and gives their legal assessment. As an alternative to the protection of such objects by the exclusive right, it is proposed to establish an obligation for bona fide users to indicate that they are not the object of copyright.