Reference:
Zabaykalov A.P., Batova M.A..
Intellectual property issues in user agreements for image creation services using artificial intelligence technology
// Law and Politics. – 2024. – № 6.
– P. 100-117.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2024.6.71008.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2024.6.71008
Read the article
Abstract: The authors analyze the user agreements of image creation services using artificial intelligence technology in terms of regulating intellectual property relations for the results obtained. In the absence of unambiguous legislative regulation on this issue, it is precisely such agreements that are of interest as a mechanism for overcoming gaps and contradictions. In addition, in the future, the norms and principles formulated in them may become customs, a kind of "lex mercatoria", and also be in demand by legislators as a basis for the development of normative acts. In particular, such services as "Kandinsky", "Fusion Brain" and "Masterpiece" are considered. Such a choice is due, on the one hand, to the popularity of these services, and, on the other hand, to their recognition of the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation, which avoids separate consideration of the issue of determining the applicable law. The research methodology is based on traditional principles, techniques and approaches for legal science: dialectics, analysis, synthesis, analogy, deduction, etc. The scientific novelty of the research and the results obtained is primarily due to the innovativeness of the relations under consideration, as well as the "lag" in the development of legislation. The analysis allows the authors to conclude that user agreements can be interpreted as recognizing the users of the corresponding service as the author of the image created using artificial intelligence. The agreements also provide for the automatic transfer of a number of rights to service owners. First of all, we are talking about providing service owners with a non-exclusive royalty-free license for a wide range of ways to use the work. At the same time, the list of methods and the approach to their description differs. In addition, certain agreements provide for the actual restriction of the rights of user authors to use the works they have created. They provide for agreements and norms that can be regarded as aimed at restricting non-property rights.
Keywords: artificial intelligence, Shedevrum, exclusive right, intellectual property, image, authorship, author, Kandinsky, Fusion Brain, license
References:
Karavaev, A.O., & Zabaykalov, A.P. (2016). On some aspects of the provider's liability for copyright infringement on the Internet. NB: Administrative Law and Practice of Administration, 5, 17-25. doi:10.7256/2306-9945.2016.5.19787
Shauro, I.G., & Zabaykalov, A.P. (2017). On the question of the typology of the Russian Federation. Issues of Russian and international law, 7(10A), 64-71.
Morkhat, P. M. (2017). Artificial intelligence: a legal view. Moscow: KT "Buki-Vedi".
Pleshakov, E.A., & Prosvirina, M.I. (2023). The problem of authorship of a work created by a neural network. Education and Law, 7, 408-411. doi:10.24412/2076-1503-2023-7-408-411
Ponomarchenko, A.E. (2023). Legal regulation of relations arising from intellectual property objects created by artificial intelligence technology. Law and the State: theory and practice, 10(226), 315-317. doi:10.47643/1815-1337_2023_10_315
Martianova, E.Y. (2019). On the issue of determining the subject