Among the multitude of AI-related panels and workshops at this year’s FilMart, one forum on the legal landscape surrounding gen AI and IP stood out.
A primary concern for producers and directors remains whether AI-assisted content can be legally protected. Hong Kong government officials sought to allay those fears at the FilMart forum “Copyright Protection and Infringement Risks of AI-Generated Content.”
“[Artistic works] can be subject to copyright measures, when the creation is clearly completed by a human,” said Sandra Hui, assistant director of intellectual property at the Hong Kong Intellectual Property Dept.
In scenarios where a director uses AI for post-production tasks like background modification or audio cleaning, the human remains the primary author. When AI is used to generate content purely from text prompts, however, the legal waters muddy.
Hui admitted that there is no internationally consistent practice or standard, a situation that will change as more caselaw develops around generative AI.
In jurisdictions like the EU, America, and Singapore, human authorship is required. Courts on the Chinese mainland have indicated that a work is copyrightable if the output reflects the prompt writer’s intellectual effort. In one example that Hui presented, a case involving AI-generated imagery hinged upon the human prompt author demonstrating detailed instructions and constant modifications to the images generated.
In the U..K, New Zealand and Hong Kong, there are specific provisions for computer-generated works without human authors, which mean works generated by AI can be protected by copyright.
Of greater concern, Hui suggested, are the inconsistent terms of service that exist from one AI platform to the next. Some AI service providers claim copyright ownership, with non-exclusive licenses granted to users, while others give copyright ownership entirely to users. This may even change according to the membership tier, with paid subscribers getting more extensive legal rights.
“One need to pay attention to that clause, specifically how one can use that scope, whether there are any restrictions that could hinder one’s expected usage method,” said Hui.
English (US) ·