top of page

AI generated art

Discussions surrounding AI generated art have been circling the art world for a while now. As a lawyer whos´ main clients are artists, I can only follow the evolution of digital tools and the use of artificial intelligence takes more and more place in the world that has witnessed the wonders of the artistic creativity of a human mind. I believe we have divided it into two fronts – those of us who appreciate the art that has been traditionally present in our world, and the other party that finds the magic of a digital artworld and the input of AI. 

As for the artists themselves, it can be both beneficial, but also challenging in terms of protection of their creators’ rights, which undoubtedly has been an issue even before the use of AI. Like most of the issues when using artificial intelligence in other industries, the art world is struggling with the main question – is it the artist who can claim the copyright, the developers of the AI or the AI itself? So far, we have the copyright law statement, which in the US legislation states that a copyrightable authorship requires human authorship, while in Europe EUIPO has stated that “only an individual is entitled to claim authorship of a work” as it must be an original expression of the author´s own intellectual creation. Therefore Naruto (Naruto v Slater) cannot be entitled to enjoy his author´s rights, which he probably won´t even want, but how about the artists whos´works have been affected by the use of AI and the concerns of who is the owner of copyright, how their rights can be protected, the ethical questions of the use of AI in the artworks, as well as the potential legal issues. Those questions remain unanswered while the AI is catching up faster than the laws do. 

speaks about the use of AI in artworks depicts what is going on in the art world right now. 

1 view0 comments


bottom of page