In January 2019, the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) issued a study that surveyed the landscape of Artificial Intelligence (AI) innovation. The WIPO Technology Trends report offers evidence-based projections to inform global policymakers on the future of AI. Subsequently, in September 2019, WIPO held a Conversation on Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence bringing together member states and other stakeholders to discuss the impact of Al on IP policy, with a view to collectively formulating the questions that policymakers need to ask.
We are preparing a response to the World Intellectual Property Organisation consultation on Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence policy, which invites feedback on an issues paper designed to help define the most pressing questions likely to face IP policymakers as AI increases in importance.
Our response brings together views from our Intellectual Property Law experts in the Law school, as well as other Brunel colleagues to formulate a broader view as the impact is wider to include areas such as privacy, consumer and competition law. The response will be published on the WIPO website.
Response of Brunel Law School & Centre for Artificial Intelligence, Dr Hayleigh Bosher
The UK Intellectual Property Office sought views on the implications artificial intelligence might have for IP policy. Hayleigh’s evidence argues that:
- The analogy of copying someone’s work inside a human brain, is not an appropriate way of considering whether copyright protected works are infringed by AI.
- The test for copyright infringement in these circumstances needs to be adapted, in that it focuses on the AI ‘Producers’ (meaning the person responsible) activities (such as data input) rather than the output.
- It should be clarified in what circumstances the current copyright exceptions apply to AI processes.
- It needs to be considered whether or not private agreements could or should be made above or below any policy decision as to the ownership of copyright in AI-generated works.
- There should be a distinction between AI-assisted works and AI-generated works.
- Additional rights should be considered such as performance and moral rights.
Read the full paper below.
Meet the Principal Investigator(s) for the project
Dr Hayleigh Bosher - Hayleigh is a Senior Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law and Associate Dean (Professional Development and Graduate Outcomes) at Brunel University London, as well as, Visiting Research Fellow at the Centre for Intellectual Property, Policy and Management, writer and Book Review Editor for the specialist IP blog IPKat, founder of the World IP Women (WIPW) network, and an Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law consultant.
Hayleigh's main research areas include copyright enforcement and infringement in the entertainment industries, particularly in music, social media, online and more recently in artificial intelligence. Hayleigh’s research always involves public and policy engagement, as such she is widely published in academic peer-reviewed journals, in the press, and has responded to a number of policy inquiries at International, European and UK level. Her most recent book; Copyright in the Music Industry, is accompanied with a playlist and podcast.
Hayleigh is a core member of the Centre for Artificial Intelligence and a member of the Research Centre for Law, Economics and Finance at Brunel. Hayleigh joined Brunel in 2018, having previously held positions at Coventry University, The University of the Arts London and the Academy of Digital Entertainment, Breda University (Netherlands).
Related Research Group(s)
AI: Social and Digital Innovation - Social, economic and strategic effects of AI and associated technologies. Impact of AI and related technologies on societies, organisations and individuals.
Law, Economics and Finance - The Centre for Law, Economics and Finance aims to advance the wider societal impact of our research by engaging with policymakers, practitioners and other stakeholder.
Project last modified 08/07/2021