  titov-sn-vestnik-2023-2.pdf |
- 31
- Features of the criminal legal characteristics of crimes attacking objects of intellectual property created with the use of information technologies and technologies of artificial intelligence
- Titov S.N. Сriminal legal assessment of infringement on intellectual property objects created using artificial intelligence technology. Vestnik of Kostroma State University, 2023, vol. 29, № 2, pp. 205–211. (In Russ.) https://doi. org/10.34216/1998-0817-2023-29-2-205-211
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.34216/1998-0817-2023-29-2-205-211
- УДК: 343.915
- EDN: JNVCFG
- Publish date: 2023-05-05
- Annotation: The article is devoted to the issues of criminal law protection of objects created by artificial intelligence. Currently, there is a legislative vacuum both in regulating the activities of artificial intelligence in general, and in matters of criminal liability for the use of these objects. The author highlights two aspects of the designated problem. First, a decision is needed regarding the possibility of recognising the algorithm as the author of the work it creates and, accordingly, fixing the copyright on this object. Secondly, it is required to study the features of objective and subjective signs of criminal acts in relation to such works. Considering the problem in the context of the theory of intellectual property and the social conditionality of the criminal law protection of intellectual property objects, the author comes to the conclusion that at present there are no grounds for recognising artificial intelligence systems as authors of works. However, the exclusive rights to such objects should belong to the owners of the algorithms. Accordingly, such results of the work of artificial intelligence can be recognised as the subject of crimes against intellectual property. Based on this position, the author describes the features of the criminal law characteristics of crimes against objects created by artificial intelligence, and defines these crimes as committed with direct intent on a large scale, illegal use of an intellectual property object or disclosure of the essence of an industrial property object created using information technologies and artificial intelligence technologies.
- Keywords: intellectual property, artificial intelligence, copyright, results of intellectual activity, criminal liability.
- Literature list: Omorov R.O. Intellektual'naja sobstvennost' i iskusstvennyj intellect [Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence]. E-Management, 2020, vol. 3, № 1, pp. 43-49. (In Russ). Savina V.S. Razvitija prava intellektual'noj sobstvennosti v sovremennom informacionnom obshhestve [Development of intellectual property law in the modern information society]. Permskij juridicheskij al'manah [Perm legal almanac], 2019, pp. 315-316. (In Russ). Bridy A. Coding Creativity: Copyright and the Artificially Intelligent Author. Stanford Technology Law Review, 2012, vol. 5, рр. 1-28. Ginsburg J.C. People Not Machines: Authorship and What It Means in the Berne Convention. IIC: international review of industrial property and copyright law, 2018, No. 2 (49), рр. 131-135. Kaur J. Intellectual Property Law in times of artificial intelligence: is it a misnomer to consider the Bot a possible IP right holder? Journal of legal studies and research, 2016 (December), vol. 2, iss. 6, pp. 45-47. Legal regime of the results of intellectual activity created by self-developing programs, ed. by O.A. Kuznetsova, V.G. Golubtsova, G.Ya. Borisevich, L.V. Borovykh et al. Perm legal almanac. Annual scientific journal, 2019, No. 1, pp. 320-328. Margot E. Kaminski and Shlomit Yanisky-Ravid. The Marrakesh Treaty for Visually Impaired Persons: Why a Treaty Was Preferable to Soft Law, 75 U. PITT. L. REV, 2014, рр. 254-300. Ruipеrez C., Gutiеrrez E., Puente C., Olivas J.A. New Challenges of Copyright Authorship in AI. Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Las Vegas, 2017, pp. 291-296. Yanisky-Ravid, Shlomit and Liu, Xiaoqiong (Jackie). When Artificial Intelligence Systems Produce Inventions: The 3A Era and an Alternative Model for Patent Law. 39 Cardozo Law Review, 2018, pp. 2239-2245. Yu R. The machine author: what level of copyright protection is appropriate for fully independent computer-generated works. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 2017, vol. 165, pp. 1241-1270.