{"title":"中国法律对人工智能作品的版权保护","authors":"Zhe Dai, Banggui Jin","doi":"10.24818/tbj/2023/13/2.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Who is the author of a work generated by AI? Can AI-generated works be protected by copyright law? This issue has attracted global attention. The vast majority of countries in the world have given a negative response to this question, but one Chinese court has given an affirmative answer, instead. Does this Chinese decision represent future thinking for the world in this area? It is necessary to investigate the reasons behind this decision, which are related to China's special interpretation of “human participation” and the criteria for judging originality. This judicial result was also related to China's current lack of a distinction between computer-assisted and AI-generated results. In the future, China may continue to uphold the existing determination; however, since China does not operate under case law, Chinese courts may still change their opinion. Moreover, China's choice may not have an impact on countries that are deeply influenced by natural law, but it may still impact some countries that are strongly influenced by utilitarianism.","PeriodicalId":41903,"journal":{"name":"Juridical Tribune-Tribuna Juridica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The copyright protection of AI-generated works under Chinese law\",\"authors\":\"Zhe Dai, Banggui Jin\",\"doi\":\"10.24818/tbj/2023/13/2.05\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Who is the author of a work generated by AI? Can AI-generated works be protected by copyright law? This issue has attracted global attention. The vast majority of countries in the world have given a negative response to this question, but one Chinese court has given an affirmative answer, instead. Does this Chinese decision represent future thinking for the world in this area? It is necessary to investigate the reasons behind this decision, which are related to China's special interpretation of “human participation” and the criteria for judging originality. This judicial result was also related to China's current lack of a distinction between computer-assisted and AI-generated results. In the future, China may continue to uphold the existing determination; however, since China does not operate under case law, Chinese courts may still change their opinion. Moreover, China's choice may not have an impact on countries that are deeply influenced by natural law, but it may still impact some countries that are strongly influenced by utilitarianism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Juridical Tribune-Tribuna Juridica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Juridical Tribune-Tribuna Juridica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24818/tbj/2023/13/2.05\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Juridical Tribune-Tribuna Juridica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24818/tbj/2023/13/2.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
The copyright protection of AI-generated works under Chinese law
Who is the author of a work generated by AI? Can AI-generated works be protected by copyright law? This issue has attracted global attention. The vast majority of countries in the world have given a negative response to this question, but one Chinese court has given an affirmative answer, instead. Does this Chinese decision represent future thinking for the world in this area? It is necessary to investigate the reasons behind this decision, which are related to China's special interpretation of “human participation” and the criteria for judging originality. This judicial result was also related to China's current lack of a distinction between computer-assisted and AI-generated results. In the future, China may continue to uphold the existing determination; however, since China does not operate under case law, Chinese courts may still change their opinion. Moreover, China's choice may not have an impact on countries that are deeply influenced by natural law, but it may still impact some countries that are strongly influenced by utilitarianism.