论文标题
人工创造:归属,所有权,特定时间的垄断
Artificial Creations: Ascription, Ownership, Time-Specific Monopolies
论文作者
论文摘要
创造力一直是人类的代名词。没有其他生物可以像人类那样吹嘘创造力。即使是最聪明的计算机也只能在其编码人员的巧妙想象中蓬勃发展。但是,这正在通过高级人工智能的系统稳步变化,这些系统表现出令人难以置信的功能(即,最少或没有人类的投入)会产生创意产品,如果人类创造的话,通常应该获得知识产权状态。这些系统可以称为人造创作者及其创意产品人工创造。人工创造者的使用可能比我们意识到的更快地成为创意和创新行业中主流生产实践的一部分。当他们这样做时,必须充分准备就可以恰当地响应所谓的人为创造力的现象。不用说,任何此类反应都必须以对公共福利的考虑为指导。这项研究通过重新审视知识产权的决定因素并批评其性质和模式来分析这种反应的样子。然后,对知识产权的这种理解进行了研究,以调查人造创造中知识产权的决定因素,以确定知识产权奖励人工创造力的内在理由,并因此发展为授予人造创造的知识产权状态的一般方式。最后,对当前的知识产权制度的人工工程(即,可版权的人工创造)和人工发明(即可专利的人工创造)的处理受到批评,并开发了为人工工程和人工发明授予知识产权的特定方式。
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.