Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 16 - Intellectual Property Law and AI

  • from Part II - Property
  • Edited by Ernest Lim, National University of Singapore, Phillip Morgan, University of York
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of Private Law and Artificial Intelligence
    Published online:
    21 March 2024
    Print publication:
    28 March 2024, pp 362-383

  • Summary

    The protection of AI-assisted and AI-generated works causes problems for existing intellectual property law. However, it is doubtful whether the purposes of patent law would be served by granting patents for AI-generated inventions. Further, AI systems are unable to make the creative choices to bring their outputs into the realm of copyright protection. However, with AI-assisted outputs, there may still be sufficient creative choices by the programmer or user to bring the output into the domain of IP protection. AI fundamentally challenges the anthropocentric copyright regime. AI technologies will require us to rethink fundamental concepts within IP law, including, for instance, the standard of obviousness applied within patent law.