The Role of Technology and Consumers’ Needs in the Evolution of Copyright Law – from Gutenberg to the Filesharers

Mezei, Péter

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2199352

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…28 We might call this factor the "legislative side" of copyright's history. 29 In England, the Stationers Company controlled book publishing for a long time. 30 The Company's monopoly was based on its role as a censor on behalf of the Crown.…”

Section: Copyright's Historymentioning

confidence: 99%

“You AIn’t Seen Nothing yet” – Arguments against the Protectability of AI-generated Outputs by Copyright Law

Mezei

2021

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Copyright's Historymentioning

confidence: 99%

“You AIn’t Seen Nothing yet” – Arguments against the Protectability of AI-generated Outputs by Copyright Law

Mezei

2021

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Matthews (1890) 587-589.;Ginsburg (2016) 237-267. 87 Compare toRose (2010) 67-88.88 Mezei (2014) 73-75. 89 Compare to e.g Gadd (2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

From Leonardo to the Next Rembrandt – The Need for AI-Pessimism in the Age of Algorithms

Mezei¹

2020

UFITA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a part of our daily life, and “algorithmic creativity” has similarly gained a spotlight recently. From paintings to music, machines generate outputs that seem to comply with various prerequisites of copyright protection. The idea (and to some degree the need) to honour such achievements by legal protection has also emerged. This article demonstrates that contrary to the view of the proponents of an AI-copyright regime, time has not ripened for AI-copyright. The core elements of copyright law - namely the concept of authorship, originality and moral rights, as well as copyright’s history and incentives - are deeply rooted in an anthropocentric (although not only author-centric) world. Unless paradigm shift in copyright law, the lack of direct human element of an AI-generated output shall lead to the unavailability of copyright protection for these outputs. The article similarly highlights why the proposed alternative forms of copyright related rights or sui generis protection are doctrinally unfounded or practically unfit to provide for a sound solution that does not destroy the existing copyright regime and diminish the value of human creations.

show abstract

From Leonardo to the Next Rembrandt – The Need for AI-Pessimism in the Age of Algorithms

Mezei

2020

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I. IntroductionLaw is a fiction, 2 and copyright law is an excellent example for legal fictions. All its norms, definitions, doctrinese.g. creativity, originality, personality, economic and moral rights, limitations and exceptions, to name a feware created and regularly re-created by human minds to serve metaphorical purposes. 3 At the same time, copyright law is not a limitless fiction. It has its historical development, roots, subjects, objects, purposes and limits. The ultimate question of copyright law is nothing else than why and to whom do laws assign copyright protection? 4 And the short answer to these questions is simple enough: expressions of the human mind shall be protected for the benefit of individual creators on the one hand and mankind in general on the other hand. This shall serve as a starting point and a guiding light when assessing the impacts and guessing the future of copyright protection of outputs/contents generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI).The symbiosis of copyright protection and technological innovation dates back to centuries and has been closely connected ever since the modern movable type-based printing press was invented by Johannes Gutenberg. In most cases, both society and the rights holders have profited from this symbiotic interconnection, as the new technologies were created for the sake of humanity and rights holders became entitled for compensation. On the other hand, Jessica Litman pointed out that "[c]opyright laws become obsolete when technology renders the assumptions on which they were based outmoded". 5 New (disruptive) technologies have made copyright law fragile. This fragility was further exaggerated by the delayed (and occasionally ineffective) legislative reactions. Likewise, users have always been more willing to take advantage of innovations rather than strictly following the provisions of copyright law (and paying royalty to the authors). Unsurprisingly, 1 The author of this paper would like to thank the organizers and participants of the meetings where parts of this paper were presented, including the 4 th Binational Seminar of the TU Dresden and the Charles University in

show abstract

The Role of Technology and Consumers’ Needs in the Evolution of Copyright Law – from Gutenberg to the Filesharers

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

“You AIn’t Seen Nothing yet” – Arguments against the Protectability of AI-generated Outputs by Copyright Law

“You AIn’t Seen Nothing yet” – Arguments against the Protectability of AI-generated Outputs by Copyright Law

From Leonardo to the Next Rembrandt – The Need for AI-Pessimism in the Age of Algorithms

From Leonardo to the Next Rembrandt – The Need for AI-Pessimism in the Age of Algorithms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About