论人工智能生成内容在著作权法中的定性  

The Qualitative Analysis of AI-Generated Content in Copyright LawV

作　　者：李扬[1] 邢贺通 Li Yang;Xing Hetong

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学民商经济法学院

出　　处：《中国版权》2024年第5期5-24,共20页China Copyright

基　　金：中国博士后科学基金第74批面上资助项目“知识产权法域外适用的学理证成与中国方案”(项目编号:2023M743914);中国版权保护中心2024年度版权研究课题“我国版权金融发展体系化研究”(项目编号:BQ2024028);中国法学会2024年度部级法学研究自选课题“生成式人工智能产业发展著作权法保障研究”[项目编号:CLS(2024)D77]的阶段性成果

摘　　要：人工智能生成内容在著作权法中如何定性的主要争议在于其是否是人类的智力成果以及能否具有独创性。人工智能生成内容是人类智力成果,应坚持并正确理解“人工智能创作工具论”,随机性也不能否认人工智能生成内容的可版权性。人工智能生成内容能够具有独创性,其独创性来源于使用者对提示词的选择和安排。人工智能生成内容的独创性判断可以比照摄影作品的独创性判断方式,只需要对最终的表达内容进行判断即可,提示词是可以用于辅助证明作品独创性的证据性材料。独创性的判断通常出现在版权侵权纠纷的案件审理过程中,而涉及人工智能生成内容版权侵权的纠纷可以分为两类:一类是被告的涉案作品是由传统创作工具创作的;一类是被告的涉案作品是由人工智能生成的。版权侵权判定的规则为“接触+实质性相似”规则,在这两类侵权纠纷中,提示词发挥的作用又有所不同。此外,对人工智能生成内容提供版权保护可能引发反公地悲剧和限制艺术家生存空间的担忧都是不必要的,以版权保护人工智能生成内容不会造成反公地悲剧,人工智能生成内容因缺乏真实性也无法对人类作品构成长远威胁。The main controversy regarding the qualitative assessment of AI-generated content under copyright law lies in whether it constitutes human intellectual achievements and whether it can possess originality.Al-generated content is indeed human intellectual achievements,and it is essential to uphold and correctly understand the“AI as a creative tool”theory.The element of randomness does not negate the copyrightability of AI-generated content.AI-generated content can possess originality,which derives from the user's selection and arrangement of prompts.The assessment of originality in Al-generated content can be analogized to the evaluation of originality in photographic works;it only requires an assessment of the final expression.Prompts can serve as evidentiary material to support the originality of a work.Typically,the determination of originality arises during the adjudication of copyright infringement cases.Disputes involving Al-generated works can be categorized into two types:one in which the defendant's work is created using traditional creative tools,and the other in which the defendant's work is also AI-generated.The rule for determining copyright infringement is the“access+substantial similarity”rule,and the role of prompts varies between these two types of disputes.Additionally,concerns that providing copyright protection to AI-generated content might lead to a tragedy of the anti-commons or limit the creative space for human artists are unfounded.Copyright protection for AI-generated content will not result in a tragedy of the anti-commons,and AI-generated works,due to their lack of authenticity,cannot pose a long-term threat to human-created works.

关 键 词：人工智能 智力成果 独创性 公地悲剧 真实性 

分 类 号：TP18[自动化与计算机技术—控制理论与控制工程] D923.41[自动化与计算机技术—控制科学与工程]