A Study on the Protection of Generative Art

Hyunjeong Lee, Daeheon Bae
{"title":"A Study on the Protection of Generative Art","authors":"Hyunjeong Lee, Daeheon Bae","doi":"10.30582/kdps.2022.35.4.257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"‘Generative Art’ is a artistic work in which some or all of the work is produced using an autonomous system programmed with algorithms; it is a field of Digital Art. This art form has existed for years, but works were not properly evaluated since it is difficult to prove what is original. However, with the advent of Non-Fungible Tokens(NFTs), the original can now be verified, and thus this art form has achieved rapid growth over the last few years. This study examined whether Generative Art can be protected by the current Copyright Act. To this end, it classified Generative Art creation based on the level of contribution by human into four different types. 1)A type in which humans create works using software, 2)a type in which humans create parts and combine them with algorithms, 3)a type in which works are created with mathematical functions, and 4)a type in which works are created using Artificial Intelligence(AI). This study also sought ways to protect works created by AI, which are not protected under the current Copyright Act. In addition, it examined how to protect Generative Art by reviewing whether the exemption provisions of Online Service Providers(OSP) can be applied when a violated work is traded on an NFT platform.","PeriodicalId":350441,"journal":{"name":"Korea Copyright Commission","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korea Copyright Commission","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30582/kdps.2022.35.4.257","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

‘Generative Art’ is a artistic work in which some or all of the work is produced using an autonomous system programmed with algorithms; it is a field of Digital Art. This art form has existed for years, but works were not properly evaluated since it is difficult to prove what is original. However, with the advent of Non-Fungible Tokens(NFTs), the original can now be verified, and thus this art form has achieved rapid growth over the last few years. This study examined whether Generative Art can be protected by the current Copyright Act. To this end, it classified Generative Art creation based on the level of contribution by human into four different types. 1)A type in which humans create works using software, 2)a type in which humans create parts and combine them with algorithms, 3)a type in which works are created with mathematical functions, and 4)a type in which works are created using Artificial Intelligence(AI). This study also sought ways to protect works created by AI, which are not protected under the current Copyright Act. In addition, it examined how to protect Generative Art by reviewing whether the exemption provisions of Online Service Providers(OSP) can be applied when a violated work is traded on an NFT platform.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生成艺术的保护研究
“生成艺术”是一种艺术作品,其中部分或全部作品是使用带有算法编程的自主系统产生的;它是数字艺术的一个领域。这种艺术形式已经存在了多年,但由于很难证明什么是原创,所以作品没有得到适当的评价。然而,随着不可替代代币(nft)的出现,现在可以验证原始代币,因此这种艺术形式在过去几年中实现了快速增长。本研究考察了生成艺术是否可以受到现行版权法的保护。为此,它根据人类的贡献程度将生成艺术创作分为四种不同的类型。1)人类使用软件创作作品的类型,2)人类使用算法创作零件并将其组合的类型,3)使用数学函数创作作品的类型,以及4)使用人工智能(AI)创作作品的类型。此次研究还探讨了现行《著作权法》中不受保护的人工智能作品的保护方案。此外,它通过审查在线服务提供商(OSP)的豁免条款是否适用于在NFT平台上交易违规作品,研究了如何保护生成艺术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Limitations on Granting Copyrights to AI-Generated Works and Alternative Protection Methodologies The Meaning and Content of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution as a Standard for Constitutionality Review Determining Fair Use and the Role of Transformative Use Test: On the Rulings in Wofsy v. De Fontbrune Quo vadis, What will be the Future of Appropriation Art?: Focusing on “The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith” A Study on the Free Use of Public Works: Focused on the Seoul Central District Court’s 2019 Gadan 5207564 Decision
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1