Abstract:
Creativity has always been synonymous with humans. No other living species could
boast of creativity as humans could. Even the smartest computers thrived only on the
ingenious imaginations of its coders. However, that is steadily changing with highly
advanced artificially intelligent systems that demonstrate incredible capabilities to
autonomously (i.e., with minimal or no human input) produce creative products that
would ordinarily deserve intellectual property status if created by a human. These
systems could be called “artificial creators” and their creative products “artificial
creations”. The use of artificial creators is likely to become a part of mainstream
production practices in the creative and innovation industries sooner than we realize.
When they do, intellectual property regimes (that are inherently designed to reward
human creativity) must be sufficiently prepared to aptly respond to the phenomenon of
what could be called “artificial creativity”. Needless to say, any such response must be
guided by considerations of public welfare. This study analyzes what that response
ought to look like by revisiting the determinants of intellectual property and critiquing
its nature and modes. This understanding of intellectual property is then applied to
investigate the determinants of intellectual property in artificial creations so as to
determine the intrinsic justifications for intellectual property rewards for artificial
creativity, and accordingly, develop general modalities for granting intellectual
property status to artificial creations. Finally, the treatment of artificial works (i.e.,
copyrightable artificial creations) and artificial inventions (i.e., patentable artificial
creations) by current intellectual property regimes is critiqued, and specific modalities
for granting intellectual property status to artificial works and artificial inventions are
developed.
