چالش هوش مصنوعی و وضعیت پدیدآور در حقوق مالکیت فکری ایران (با تأکید بر چت جی.پی.تی و مالکیت ادبی و هنری)
نویسنده
استادیار پژوهشگاه علوم و فناوری اطلاعات ایران (ایرانداک)
چکیده
پیشرفت‌های پرشتابی که در هوش مصنوعی و ابزار‌های آن، مانند چت جی.پی.تی رخ داده و می‌دهد، تبیین موضوعات مرتبط با مالکیت فکری در این باره را ضروری ساخته است. با توجه به کمبود منابع مربوط در ادبیات حقوقی فارسی در این زمینه، کوشش شده تا از راه مراجعه به متون تازه خارجی، زوایای این موضوع بررسی شود. روش این بررسی، توصیفی – تحلیلی است که در آن، منابع حاصل که به روش اسنادی و به شیوه کتابخانه‌ای گردآوری شده‌اند، ابتدا توصیف و توضیح می‌شوند و سپس مورد تحلیل قرار می‌گیرند. پرسش اصلی این مقاله آن است که آیا هوش مصنوعی و چت جی.پی.تی می‌تواند بر پایه اصول حاکم بر حقوق مالکیت فکری، به‌عنوان پدیدآور شناخته شود یا نه؟ در کوشش برای یافتن پاسخی منطقی و حقوقی به این پرسش، ضمن بررسی پیشینه تحقیق و نظرهایی که در این باره داده شده، اظهارنظرهای مطرح شده در ایران و خارج از ایران ارائه گردیده و پس از دسته‌بندی این نظرها، راه‌حل‌های ممکن بیان شده است. مقاله با نتیجه‌گیری از موضوعات مطرح شده و بیان برخی پیشنهادهای ممکن در حوزه حقوق داخلی و جهانی پایان یافته است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
1. Abbott, R. (2019). The ownership of AI-invented patents. Journal of Law and Technology.
2. Abbott, R. (2021). Intellectual property and the AI revolution: Rethinking ownership. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology.
3. ABC News (2023). Texas Judge Issues New AI Order for Legal Filings. Retrieved from www.abcnews.com.
4. Abdulla, A. (2021). AI Inventors: Do They Exist, And Does It Matter? Chambers and Partners. (pp. 3-5).
5. Akbari, M. 2002. "Legal Challenges and AI in Iran." Iranian Journal of Intellectual Property.
6. Asadpour, F., & Pahlevanzadeh, A. (2024). The impact of artificial intelligence legal developments on intellectual property rights. Quarterly Journal of Private and Criminal Law Research, 19(4), Winter 2024.
7. Bharati, Rahul Kailas. (2024). “ AI and intellectual property: Legal frameworks and future directions” at International Journal of Law, Justice and Jurisprudence 2024; 4(2): 207-215 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.22271/2790-0673.2024.v4.i2c.141.
8. Beigzadeh, S. (2020). Ghostwriting of academic texts from the perspective of intellectual property law and the role of IRANDOC in this regard. (Research project).
9. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610-623).
10. Betz, S. (2024). 7 types of artificial intelligence. Retrieved from https://builtin.com/artificial-intelligence/types-of-artificial-intelligence.
11. Binns, V. 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Legal Frameworks: A New Approach to IP Law." Oxford University Press.
12. Bloomberg Law. (2023). Privacy Challenges Facing AI Developers: OpenAI Privacy Violation Lawsuit. Bloomberg Law. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberglaw.com & Search Engine Journal. (2023). ChatGPT Creator Faces Privacy Violation Allegations. Search Engine Journal. Retrieved from https://www.searchenginejournal.com.
13. Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., ... & Askell, A. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 1877-1901). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2005.14165.
14. Carrick, D., & Kesteven, S. (2023). This US lawyer used ChatGPT to research a legal brief with embarrassing results. We could all learn from his error. University of New South Wales. Retrieved from www.unsw.edu.au & Russell, J. (2023). Sanctions ordered for lawyers who relied on ChatGPT artificial intelligence to prepare court brief. Courthouse News Service. Retrieved from www.courthousenews.com & Wu, S. (2023). Lawyers who cited fake cases invented by ChatGPT must pay. The Register. Retrieved from www.theregister.com.
15. Christiano, P., Leike, J., Brown, T., Martic, M., Legg, S., & Amodei, D. (2017). Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 4299-4307). doi:10.48550/arXiv.1706.03741.
16. Devlin, J., Chang, M. W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019). BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. doi:10.18653/v1/N19-1423.
17. Fadavi, A., & Lalalizadeh, M. (2024). Ownership of artificial intelligence creations: A review of new challenges in intellectual property law in the era of technology. Islamic Law Research Journal. Retrieved from https://journals.isu.ac.ir/article_77375.html?lang=en.
18. Farahani, R. 2022."Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, and the Iranian Legal System." Tehran University Law Journal.
19. Falk, R. A. (2015). Status of Law in International Society. Princeton University Press.
20. Farahani, R. "Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, and the Iranian Legal System." Tehran University Law Journal, 2022.
21. Fisher, E., McLeod, A. J., Savage, A., & Simkin, M. G. (2015). Ghostwriters in the cloud. Journal of Accounting Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccedu.2015.11.001
22. Foley & Lardner LLP. (2023). Australia appeal decision reverses direction on AI inventorship.
23. Gervais, D. (2019). AI, inventorship and intellectual property. IP Theory.
24. Harvard Business Review. (2023). How artificial intelligence is reshaping business.
25. https://aftabnews.ir/fa/news/494087.
26. https://www.thetechportal.com & High Court of Delhi. (2023). Asian News International v. OpenAI, Case No. 2023-ANI-45. Retrieved from https://delhihighcourt.nic.in.
27. https://www.michalsons.com/blog/authors-guild-v-openai-copyright-infringement/74945/ 2024.
28. Jafari Langaroudi, M. J. (2009). Property Law (6th ed.). Tehran: Ganj Danesh.
29. Johnson, M. 2021. "Intellectual Property in the Age of Artificial Intelligence." International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law.
30. Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H. (2021). Speech and language processing (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall.
31. Koller, D. (2023). DMCA and generative AI: Navigating copyright issues in the training of AI models (p. 52). Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 35(1), 45-63.
32. Latifzadeh, A. (2024). Legal implications of the creative role of generative artificial intelligence in creating literary and artistic works. Private Law Journal, 21(1), April 2024.
33. Lee, J., & Wilson, H. 2021. "AI and Patent Law: Legal Developments in Europe." Cambridge University Press.
34. Lemley, M. (2020). The case for human ownership of AI-inventions. Stanford Law Review.
35. Mirshamsi, M. H., & Farzi, M. (2018). Analysis and critique of the Bayh-Dole Act in the United States regarding intellectual property rights in publicly funded research. Quarterly Journal of Private Law Research, 6(24), Fall 2018, 143.
36. Nahaavandi, E., et al. (2016). The concept and conditions of achieving a joint literary and artistic work in the legal systems of Iran and the United States. Private Law Journal, 28.
37. Netflix. (2023). How Netflix uses artificial intelligence to improve the user experience. Netflix Tech Blog. (pp. 3-5).
38. Oguama, Lawrence. 2022). Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence: Emerging Prospects and Challenges (February 28, 2022). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4046151 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4046151
39. OpenAI. (2023). GPT-4 technical report. OpenAI. (pp. 1-3).
40. Picht, P.G, Thouvenin, Florent, (2023),AI and IP: Theory to Policy and Back Again – Policy and Research Recommendations at the Intersection of Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property, IC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law,54 (4), 1-25. DOI: 10.1007/s40319-023-01344-5
41. Raffel, C., Shazeer, N., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., ... & Liu, P. J. (2020). Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 21(140), 1-67.
42. Rahbari, E., & Shabanpour, A. (2023). Challenges of applying artificial intelligence as a judge in legal proceedings. Legal Research Journal, 25(Special Issue on Law and Technology).
43. Roumeliotis, K. I., & Tselikas, N. D. (2023). ChatGPT and Open-AI Models: A Preliminary Review. Future Internet, 15(6), 192. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15060192.
44. Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2020). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson. (pp. 15-18).
45. Sabet, B., Eslami-Tabar, S., Lame’, E., & Rouzbehani, N. (2024). Challenges of the intellectual property system in drug research and development with the help of artificial intelligence. Journal of Health Research and Development, 1(2), 73.
46. Shakeri, Z. (2024). Some effective factors on the transformation of the intellectual property system: Expansion or limitation of rights. Biannual Journal of Research and Development in Humanities.
47. Shobiri Zanjani, S. H. (2010). Intellectual property rights in computer-based works (derived from computers). Modares Human Sciences (Comparative Legal Studies), 14(2), Summer 2010.
48. Smith, Paul. (2021) "AI and the Evolution of Intellectual Property." European Journal of Law and Technology.
49. Thaler, S. (2023). Can AI be an inventor? Final Supreme Court DABUS appeal. Wilson Gunn.
50. Timmermans, E. (2022). "Legal Frameworks for AI-Generated Works in the EU." European :union: Law Journal.
51. Tushnet, R. (2022). Legal challenges in the era of AI and copyright. Oxford Journal of Intellectual Property.
52. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., ... & Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. Curran Associates, Inc. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762.
53. WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization). (2021)"Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence." WIPO Report.
54. Yaghouti, E., & Nakhjavan, A. (2023). Legal status of transactions conducted by artificial intelligence: Theory of the virtual lawyer. Economic and Commercial Law Research, 1(1), 41.
55. Zakerinia, H. (2023). The nature and basis of civil liability arising from artificial intelligence in Iranian law and EU countries. Private Law, 20(1).
56. Zarkalam, S. (2014). Literary and Artistic Property Law. Tehran: SAMT.
57. Zimmerman, S. (2022). "Intellectual Property in the Age of AI." Journal of European Intellectual Property.
2. Abbott, R. (2021). Intellectual property and the AI revolution: Rethinking ownership. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology.
3. ABC News (2023). Texas Judge Issues New AI Order for Legal Filings. Retrieved from www.abcnews.com.
4. Abdulla, A. (2021). AI Inventors: Do They Exist, And Does It Matter? Chambers and Partners. (pp. 3-5).
5. Akbari, M. 2002. "Legal Challenges and AI in Iran." Iranian Journal of Intellectual Property.
6. Asadpour, F., & Pahlevanzadeh, A. (2024). The impact of artificial intelligence legal developments on intellectual property rights. Quarterly Journal of Private and Criminal Law Research, 19(4), Winter 2024.
7. Bharati, Rahul Kailas. (2024). “ AI and intellectual property: Legal frameworks and future directions” at International Journal of Law, Justice and Jurisprudence 2024; 4(2): 207-215 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.22271/2790-0673.2024.v4.i2c.141.
8. Beigzadeh, S. (2020). Ghostwriting of academic texts from the perspective of intellectual property law and the role of IRANDOC in this regard. (Research project).
9. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610-623).
10. Betz, S. (2024). 7 types of artificial intelligence. Retrieved from https://builtin.com/artificial-intelligence/types-of-artificial-intelligence.
11. Binns, V. 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Legal Frameworks: A New Approach to IP Law." Oxford University Press.
12. Bloomberg Law. (2023). Privacy Challenges Facing AI Developers: OpenAI Privacy Violation Lawsuit. Bloomberg Law. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberglaw.com & Search Engine Journal. (2023). ChatGPT Creator Faces Privacy Violation Allegations. Search Engine Journal. Retrieved from https://www.searchenginejournal.com.
13. Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., ... & Askell, A. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 1877-1901). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2005.14165.
14. Carrick, D., & Kesteven, S. (2023). This US lawyer used ChatGPT to research a legal brief with embarrassing results. We could all learn from his error. University of New South Wales. Retrieved from www.unsw.edu.au & Russell, J. (2023). Sanctions ordered for lawyers who relied on ChatGPT artificial intelligence to prepare court brief. Courthouse News Service. Retrieved from www.courthousenews.com & Wu, S. (2023). Lawyers who cited fake cases invented by ChatGPT must pay. The Register. Retrieved from www.theregister.com.
15. Christiano, P., Leike, J., Brown, T., Martic, M., Legg, S., & Amodei, D. (2017). Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 4299-4307). doi:10.48550/arXiv.1706.03741.
16. Devlin, J., Chang, M. W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019). BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. doi:10.18653/v1/N19-1423.
17. Fadavi, A., & Lalalizadeh, M. (2024). Ownership of artificial intelligence creations: A review of new challenges in intellectual property law in the era of technology. Islamic Law Research Journal. Retrieved from https://journals.isu.ac.ir/article_77375.html?lang=en.
18. Farahani, R. 2022."Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, and the Iranian Legal System." Tehran University Law Journal.
19. Falk, R. A. (2015). Status of Law in International Society. Princeton University Press.
20. Farahani, R. "Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, and the Iranian Legal System." Tehran University Law Journal, 2022.
21. Fisher, E., McLeod, A. J., Savage, A., & Simkin, M. G. (2015). Ghostwriters in the cloud. Journal of Accounting Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccedu.2015.11.001
22. Foley & Lardner LLP. (2023). Australia appeal decision reverses direction on AI inventorship.
23. Gervais, D. (2019). AI, inventorship and intellectual property. IP Theory.
24. Harvard Business Review. (2023). How artificial intelligence is reshaping business.
25. https://aftabnews.ir/fa/news/494087.
26. https://www.thetechportal.com & High Court of Delhi. (2023). Asian News International v. OpenAI, Case No. 2023-ANI-45. Retrieved from https://delhihighcourt.nic.in.
27. https://www.michalsons.com/blog/authors-guild-v-openai-copyright-infringement/74945/ 2024.
28. Jafari Langaroudi, M. J. (2009). Property Law (6th ed.). Tehran: Ganj Danesh.
29. Johnson, M. 2021. "Intellectual Property in the Age of Artificial Intelligence." International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law.
30. Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H. (2021). Speech and language processing (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall.
31. Koller, D. (2023). DMCA and generative AI: Navigating copyright issues in the training of AI models (p. 52). Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 35(1), 45-63.
32. Latifzadeh, A. (2024). Legal implications of the creative role of generative artificial intelligence in creating literary and artistic works. Private Law Journal, 21(1), April 2024.
33. Lee, J., & Wilson, H. 2021. "AI and Patent Law: Legal Developments in Europe." Cambridge University Press.
34. Lemley, M. (2020). The case for human ownership of AI-inventions. Stanford Law Review.
35. Mirshamsi, M. H., & Farzi, M. (2018). Analysis and critique of the Bayh-Dole Act in the United States regarding intellectual property rights in publicly funded research. Quarterly Journal of Private Law Research, 6(24), Fall 2018, 143.
36. Nahaavandi, E., et al. (2016). The concept and conditions of achieving a joint literary and artistic work in the legal systems of Iran and the United States. Private Law Journal, 28.
37. Netflix. (2023). How Netflix uses artificial intelligence to improve the user experience. Netflix Tech Blog. (pp. 3-5).
38. Oguama, Lawrence. 2022). Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence: Emerging Prospects and Challenges (February 28, 2022). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4046151 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4046151
39. OpenAI. (2023). GPT-4 technical report. OpenAI. (pp. 1-3).
40. Picht, P.G, Thouvenin, Florent, (2023),AI and IP: Theory to Policy and Back Again – Policy and Research Recommendations at the Intersection of Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property, IC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law,54 (4), 1-25. DOI: 10.1007/s40319-023-01344-5
41. Raffel, C., Shazeer, N., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., ... & Liu, P. J. (2020). Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 21(140), 1-67.
42. Rahbari, E., & Shabanpour, A. (2023). Challenges of applying artificial intelligence as a judge in legal proceedings. Legal Research Journal, 25(Special Issue on Law and Technology).
43. Roumeliotis, K. I., & Tselikas, N. D. (2023). ChatGPT and Open-AI Models: A Preliminary Review. Future Internet, 15(6), 192. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15060192.
44. Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2020). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson. (pp. 15-18).
45. Sabet, B., Eslami-Tabar, S., Lame’, E., & Rouzbehani, N. (2024). Challenges of the intellectual property system in drug research and development with the help of artificial intelligence. Journal of Health Research and Development, 1(2), 73.
46. Shakeri, Z. (2024). Some effective factors on the transformation of the intellectual property system: Expansion or limitation of rights. Biannual Journal of Research and Development in Humanities.
47. Shobiri Zanjani, S. H. (2010). Intellectual property rights in computer-based works (derived from computers). Modares Human Sciences (Comparative Legal Studies), 14(2), Summer 2010.
48. Smith, Paul. (2021) "AI and the Evolution of Intellectual Property." European Journal of Law and Technology.
49. Thaler, S. (2023). Can AI be an inventor? Final Supreme Court DABUS appeal. Wilson Gunn.
50. Timmermans, E. (2022). "Legal Frameworks for AI-Generated Works in the EU." European :union: Law Journal.
51. Tushnet, R. (2022). Legal challenges in the era of AI and copyright. Oxford Journal of Intellectual Property.
52. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., ... & Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. Curran Associates, Inc. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762.
53. WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization). (2021)"Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence." WIPO Report.
54. Yaghouti, E., & Nakhjavan, A. (2023). Legal status of transactions conducted by artificial intelligence: Theory of the virtual lawyer. Economic and Commercial Law Research, 1(1), 41.
55. Zakerinia, H. (2023). The nature and basis of civil liability arising from artificial intelligence in Iranian law and EU countries. Private Law, 20(1).
56. Zarkalam, S. (2014). Literary and Artistic Property Law. Tehran: SAMT.
57. Zimmerman, S. (2022). "Intellectual Property in the Age of AI." Journal of European Intellectual Property.
