The Rapid Response Institute

Tag: European Union

  • Who Owns the Intellectual Property Generated by AI?

    Who Owns the Intellectual Property Generated by AI?

    Disclaimer:  The author is not an attorney, and this document is not meant to be a legal opinion in any sense.  Interested readers should contact their legal counsel for any Intellectual Property (IP) determination.  This blog simply raises a question that is generally not addressed regarding ownership rights of the content and products developed using artificial intelligence emerging technologies.  One suspects that going forward, this issue will become more forefront.

    Moreover, this is a fast-moving environment with new local laws and promulgated regulations continuously updated.  Readers are cautioned that some of the materials herein may be quickly dated.  Appropriate legal counsel and other experts should be consulted.

    Like most new software technologies, there is a period of the Wild West where anything seems to go.  Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been no different, but now these horses are beginning to be reined in.

    It is generally accepted that the ownership of content developed using third party software belongs to the generator of said content.  Data, the results of analytics and their interpretation, computer generated audio video materials, etc. are generally covered by this convention and codified by law.  The spreadsheet vendor does not own the financial analysis that leads to major value add to the firm.  Conversely, if the financial model is flawed, the software developer is generally not liable.

    However, Artificial Intelligence is a different technology model.  It dictates that organizational AI policies recognize the disruptive change caused.  For example, the publisher of my new book, Navigating the Data Minefields: Management’s Guide to Better Decision-Making has issued its author, AI Policy.

    An AI engine searches for data and information from a wide variety of sources.  It then amalgamates and analyzes and/or develops what some consider a new product or solution–document, image, or new approach/model, e.g. medical technique.  However, did the AI secure permission from the data owner(s) or even cite its source(s)?  The most likely answer is no.  A follow-on statement might be, “why do we need that?”

    Copyright

    According to the U.S. Copyright Office, “Copyright is a type of intellectual property that protects original works of authorship as soon as an author fixes the work in a tangible form of expression.  In copyright law, there are a lot of different types of works, including paintings, photographs, illustrations, musical compositions, sound recordings, computer programs, books, poems, blog posts, movies, architectural works, plays, and so much more!”  The Copyright Office goes on to state, “Works are original when they are independently created by a human author and have a minimal degree of creativity.”
     
    In the UK, “Two conflicting views emerged.  The tech sector believes the copyright to AI-generated content should belong to users, whereas the creative sector wants this content to be excluded from ownership completely.”
     
    From a 2022 Reuters article about a lawsuit over, Gen AI generated content.
    “Accordingly, unless a generative AI is used in such a manner that its output would be recognizably linked to some person or entity who is likely to actively police the use of their works and whose works are likely to be registered, the risk of the generative AI’s users being sued for infringement seems low.
     
    In practice, the legal issues surrounding generative AI mean that its outputs should be handled in a manner similar to materials covered by open source or creative commons licenses — i.e., with policies and procedures which ensure use only in appropriate manners and cases.  This includes determining if a project where generative AI would be used is something whose results would need to be protected and, if so, determining whether tools are available for that protection other than copyright.
     
    It also includes avoiding high risk uses, such as using generative AI to attempt to replicate the work of a particular artist whose materials were used as training data. However, with intentionality and forethought, the risks associated with generative AI can be managed, and this new technology can bring tremendous benefits to those who deploy it intelligently.“
     
    Later, we will address two other types of Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks.  Both have a lengthy pedigree as well that must be considered in our new AI era.
     

    Data Privacy

    Data privacy and security are major issues organizations must deal with, and the regulatory burden is onerous.  Most readers have heard of HIPPA; the need to keep individual medical records confidential.  HIPPA is symptomatic of the need to treat ALL data in secure and private.

    From the GDPR, “The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is the toughest privacy and security law in the world.  Though it was drafted and passed by the European Union (EU), it imposes obligations onto organizations anywhere, so long as they target or collect data related to people in the EU.  The regulation was put into effect on May 25, 2018.   The GDPR will levy harsh fines against those who violate its privacy and security standards, with penalties reaching into the tens of millions of euros.”

    The EU regulations are viewed as the ‘gold standard’ and others worldwide are in the process of emulating them.  Increased date management regulations are a given, as is their impact on AI learning.

    IP Guardrails

    Individuals and organizations jealously guard their intellectual properties, as they should.  Just think of the significant value Disney has built over 100 years from a cartoon mouse.

    Some may see AI as an assault on the organization’s core and take legal action they believe appropriate.  Others will try to capitalize on loopholes.  This is not different behavior from the IP current practice.

    AI advocates will find themselves in the midst of what could be a significant number of legal challenges as the technology and its regulation matures.  The current long-standing legal battles over social media platforms is but one example of this process.

    IP Ownership of AI Generated Content: The Movie

    Summary of the Video

    Briefly, in the video dated January 7, 2024, the attorney makes the following key points:

    • Copyright extends only to humans and AI content generated by products such as ChatGPT do not meet the ‘human’ authorship test.  However, if a human is actively engaged in the development of (and change) said content, things get less clear.
    •  Regarding AI generated inventions, Patent law becomes more relevant.  The speaker argues that ‘at least today’ patent laws mirror copyright because human creativity is key.
    • As far as AI generated Trademarks are concerned, these products such as logos, tag lines, etc. do not enjoy original authorship protection, but their ‘first use’ has precedence.  For more information he references the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
    • Finally, he states that this area of the law is unfolding, and change is likely.

    These points were transcribed by this pundit.  As such, they are only his perception and must be viewed skeptically when addressing a specific ‘real’ question regarding this subject matter.  The attorney’s fifth bullet is probably the most important one.

    Final Thoughts

    Intellectual Property ownership is an area that technologists and software developers are generally not involved with.  Additionally, many have historically treated the content found online as if it is in the public domain.  We now know that authorship should be attributed.

    For most of the things individuals and organizations do with online content this is not an issue.  Blogs, political opinion and technology critique among others come to mind.

    However, AI has the potential to change fortunes (wealth, reputation and other) of individuals and organizations.  Finally, the regulatory environment is evolving, and dramatic changes are most likely forthcoming.

    Individual creators, management and others have a responsibility to assure AI developed content meets, and not just the regulations (in each jurisdiction the firm operates in).  Moreover, governance enforcement models must add AI technologies and assure that others are not infringing on the firm’s IP with potential risks of capital and reputational loss.

    One Last Thing

    With the need to protect data as well as assure all key intellectual property is protected, will this negatively impact on the output of AI models?  What will be the basis of gen AI training if it cannot gain access to the universe of data they require?  And yes, I know we often sign away certain rights when we engage with some organizations, but we can ‘opt out’ of allowing access to our data.

    Another Blog for a later time but in the meantime, just a question.

    How is your organization addressing these and other Intellectual Property issues emerging from Gen AI and other content developers?

    Pre order our new book

    Navigating the Data Minefields:

    Management’s Guide to Better Decision-Making

    We are living in an era of data and software exponential growth.  A substantive flood hitting us every day.  Geek heaven!  But what if information technology is not your cup of tea and you may even have your kids help with your smart devices?  This may not be a problem at home; however, what if you job depends on Big Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI)?

    Available April 2025

    Ordering Information

    For More Information

    Please note, RRI does not endorse or advocate the links to any third-party materials herein.  They are provided for education and entertainment only.

    See our Economic Value Proposition Matrix® (EVPM) for additional information and a free version to build your own EVPM.

    The author’s credentials in this field are available on his LinkedIn page.  Moreover, Dr. Shemwell is the coauthor of the recently published book, “Smart Manufacturing: Integrating Transformational Technologies for Competitiveness and Sustainability.”  His focus is on Operational Technologies.

    We are also pleased to announce our forthcoming book to be published by CRC Press in 2025, Navigating the Data Minefields: Management’s Guide to Better Decision-Making.  This is a book for the non-IT executive who is faced with making major technology decisions as firms acquire advanced technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI).

    “People fail to get along because they fear each other; they fear each other because they don’t know each other; they don’t know each other because they have not communicated with each other.” (Martin Luther King speech at Cornell College, 1962).  For more information on Cross Cultural Engagement, check out our Cross-Cultural Serious Game.  You can contact this author as well.

    For more details regarding climate change models, check out Bjorn Lomborg and his book, False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet.

    Regarding the economics of Climate Change, check out our blog, Crippling Green.

    For those start-up firms addressing energy (including renewables) challenges, the author can put you in touch with Global Energy Mentors which provide no-cost mentoring services from energy experts.  If interested, check it out and give me a shout.

  • Innovation: The Key to the Global Future

    Innovation: The Key to the Global Future

    Henry Ford, the Founder of Ford Motor Company is famously attributed to this statement.  “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”  In other words, most of us think linearly.

    One wonders if this line of reasoning is the best way during the current situation.  Perhaps, non-linear mindsets are more appropriate.

    Challenges

    Currently, many define an existential threat as Climate Change.  Additionally, the global economy, the War in Ukraine, bad actors and other ills make the daily news.  We are also told the time is of the essence.  However, it appears the window will close before the appropriate linear responses can come online.

    As the pandemic unfolded in early 2020, we penned a piece on the role innovation would play addressing the global scourge. We put forth some points we believed salient at the time such as:

    • The rise of remote work
    • The ability to scale quickly, i.e., vaccines, ventilators, et. al.
    • Changes in Clinical Trial protocols

    From the same blog, this pundit has long advocated that, “the use of knowledge enabled by technology can reduce project cycle time dramatically.  It can also significantly reduce project cost as well.”

    As we look back on that period, the collective global ‘we’ accomplished a lot.  A plethora of useful materials were developed and published by all manner Subject Matter Experts (SME) as well as those with ‘life knowledge.’  We chose to capture and repost materials (Covid-19 Business Continuity Resources) that could of use to those business executives struggling with work force issues.  These materials remain available.

    Regrettable, the term SCIENCE was terribly misused, including by medical professionals and professional scientists, all of whom should have known better.  This discussion is further developed in our blog, They Blinded Me with Science.   For interested readers, the piece develops the concepts of science and pseudo-science as well as a brief methodology all can use to help them assess what they are being told about major issues.

    Actual Science has moved humanity out of the caves and into our modern world.  Likely, it can help us address current and future global challenges.  The proven innovative use of the Scientific Method is one path forward.

    SpaceX – NASA

    Elon Musk is in the news for a number of reasons.  He is perhaps one of the best know billionaires.  In the opinion of this pundit, the partnership between his company SpaceX and NASA appears to be one of the most productive Public-Private Partnerships (PPP).  Perhaps this good or best practice could be emulated by others seeking new ways to innovate.

    Realistic Energy Transition

    Energy Transition is all the rage with all manner or organization jumping on board.  Somewhat reminds me of the late 1990s dot.com era.  According to Wikipedia, after the ensuring bust, “the NASDAQ-100 had dropped to 1,114, down 78% from its peak.”  Makes one wonder that this might not be the first rodeo for the latest ‘change the world shinny object.’

    Previously, we noted that the replacement of a major highway ramp in Houston, TX USA is slated to take two years.  Additionally, according to McKinsey, “The goal is to install 500,000 public chargers—publicly accessible charging stations compatible with all vehicles and technologies—nationwide by 2030.”  Message: infrastructure development takes a certain amount of time.

    Also from McKinsey, “Capital spending on physical assets for energy and land-use systems in the net-zero transition between 2021 and 2050 would amount to about $275 trillion, or $9.2 trillion per year on average, an annual increase of as much as $3.5 trillion from today.  To put this increase in comparative terms, the $3.5 trillion is approximately equivalent, in 2020, to half of global corporate profits, one-quarter of total tax revenue, and 7 percent of household spending.”

    As of this writing the global stock markets appear to be in freefall.  Some believe, including this author that a Recession is imminent.  This begs the obvious.  How will this linear effort be paid for and what will be the return on this huge investment?

    There must be a better way.

    Innovate, Innovate, Innovate

    In his recent book, False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet noted climate change advocate, Bjorn Lomborg expresses concern regarding linear type scenarios and investments being made reduces climate change to Net Zero.

    He argues that regardless of efforts made such as described herein, we will not defeat global warming.  The temperature will rise anyway.

    If this is the case, then the ROI from a $275 trillion dollar commitment may in fact be negative.  This might spell economic disaster at a sustained level.

    Lomborg makes the case that innovation is key.  His perspective seems to be more on university led research supported by governments.  There is a role for government to fun basic research and many have for decades.

    Entrepreneurs have been advancing humankind for hundreds of years.  With proper market signals, we can expect a new generation to rise to the occasion addressing the energy transition and ultimately climate change.

    The author is aware of a number of ‘Green’ efforts underway to encourage the development of new commercial technologies.  While not advocating for investment in an Incubator or Accelerator, it seems reasonable that start-up organizations addressing these challenges be encouraged.

    What Role Does Innovation Play in Your Firm’s Approach to Climate Change?.

    For More Information

    Please note, RRI does not endorse or advocate the links to any third-party materials herein.  They are provided for education and entertainment only.

    The author’s credentials in this field are available on his LinkedIn page.

    Disclaimer, the author has no personal or business relationship with Bjorn Lomborg or his publications other than reading and commenting on his latest book, False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet.

    For those start-up firms addressing energy challenges, the author is a member of Global Energy Mentors which provide no-cost mentoring services from energy experts.  If interested, check it out and give us a shout.

    For more information on Cross Cultural Engagement, check out our Cross Cultural Serious Game.  You can contact this author as well.