Copyright and Quality of Instructions in Works Generated by Artificial Intelligence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25057/2500672X.1726Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Copyright, Iterative Process, Ownership, OriginalityAbstract
In the legal framework of copyright, the emergence of generative artificial intelligence has marked a significant academic disruption that raises a debate associated with determining whether works generated with these technologies are eligible for copyright protection. This research addresses this issue by proposing three parameters: original, non-generic instructions that are part of an iterative process. These are key criteria for establishing the necessary quality threshold that user-entered instructions must meet in order to obtain results that comply with the regulatory requirements established by current legislation for their protection as original works. To this end, the concept of originality was addressed in its objective, subjective, and mixed dimensions. In addition, an analysis was carried out on various doctrinal positions regarding the dilemma of authorship, especially with regard to the identification of the appropriate human actor to hold that title. It was concluded that it is the users who, from a mixed perspective of originality, by contributing intentionality, should hold rights over the works generated. However, legal doctrine should focus on formulating arguments that allow the attribution of authorship to be centered on the human being.
Downloads
References
Abbott, R. y Rothman, E. (2023). Disrupting Creativity: Copyright Law in the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Florida Law Review, 1141-1201. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/uflr75&div=34&id=&page=
Adobe Firefly (2024). Adobe Firefly Terms of Use. https://www.adobe.com/legal/terms.html
Akhtar, Z. B. (2024). Unveiling the evolution of generative AI (GAI): a comprehensive and investigative analysis toward LLM models (2021-2024) and beyond. Journal of Electrical Systems and Information Technology, 11, Article number: 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43067-024-00145-1
Aucejo, E. A. y Ramón, F. (2023). Inteligencia Artificial: “chat GPT” versus la Ley y el Derecho. Jaque al derecho de la propiedad intelectual. Revista de Educación y Derecho, (28). https://doi.org/10.1344/REYD2023.28.43933
Ávila, J. A. (2021). Inteligencia artificial: Discusiones e implicaciones actuales en materia de Derechos de Autor. Revista de la Facultad de Derecho de México, 55-79. https://revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rfdm/article/download/80288/71393
Aziz, A. (2023). Artificial intelligence produced original work: A new approach to copyright protection and ownership. European Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, 2(2), 9-16. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejai.2023.2.2.15
Azuaje, M. (2020). Protección jurídica de los productos de la inteligencia artificial en el sistema de propiedad intelectual. Revista Jurídica Austral, 1(1) 319-342. https://doi.org/10.26422/RJA.2020.0101.azu
Brynjolfsson, E., Li, D. y Raymond, L. (2023). Generative AI at work. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w31161/w31161.pdf
Chu, E., Andreas, J., Ansolabehere, S. y Roy, D. (2023). Language models trained on media diets can predict public opinion. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.16779
Chui, M., Hazan, E., Roberts, R., Singla, A., Smaje, K., Sukharevsky, A., Yee, L. y Zemmel, R. (2023). The economic potential of generative AI: The next productivity frontier. McKinsey & Company.
Correa, S. y Maccarini, L. (2023). Autosupervisión de alucinaciones en grandes modelos del lenguaje: LLteaM. Journal of Computer-Assisted Linguistic Research, 7, 60-85. https://doi.org/10.4995/jclr.2023.20408
Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos (1884). Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/111/53/
Court of Justice of the European Union (2009, 16 de julio). Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening, Case C-5/08. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62008CJ0005
Court of Justice of the European Union (2011, 1 de diciembre). Eva-Maria Painer v Standard VerlagsGmbH et al., Case C-145/10. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62010CJ0145
Cyphert, A. B. (2024). Generative AI, plagiarism, and copyright infringement in legal documents. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 25(2) 49-66. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mjlst/vol25/iss2/9
Dai, Z. y Jin, B. (2023). The copyright protection of AI-generated works under Chinese law. Juridical Tribune, 13(12), 241-260. https://doi.org/10.24818/TBJ/2023/13/2.05
Di Dio, C., Ardizzi, M., Schieppati, S. V., Massaro, D., Gilli, G., Gallese, V. y Marchetti, A. (2023). Art made by artificial intelligence: The effect of authorship on aesthetic judgments. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 19(5), 1164-1176. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aca0000602
Díaz, J. (2023). Inteligencia artificial, noticias y medios de comunicación: Una aproximación jurídica desde la perspectiva de la propiedad intelectual al concepto y atribución de autoría. Textual & Visual Media, 17(1), 7-21. https://doi.org/10.56418/txt.17.1.2023.1
Estupiñán, J., Leyva, M. Y., Peñafiel, A. J. y El Assafiri, Y. (2021). Inteligencia artificial y propiedad intelectual. Revista Universidad y Sociedad, 362-368. https://rus.ucf.edu.cu/index.php/rus/article/download/2490/2445/
Ginsburg, J. C. (2018). People not machines: Authorship and what it means in the Berne Convention. IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 49, 131-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-018-0670-x
He, T. (2024). AI originality revisited: Can we prompt copyright over ai-generated pictures? GRUR International, 73(4), 299-307. https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikae024
Hristov, K. (2020). Artificial intelligence and the copyright survey. Journal of Science Policy & Governance, 16(1). https://www.sciencepolicyjournal.org/uploads/5/4/3/4/5434385/hristov_jspg_v16.pdf
Kretschmer, M., Margoni, T. y Oruc, P. (2024). Copyright law and the lifecycle of machine learning models. IIC, 55, 110-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01419-3
Le, T. P. (2024). Copyright protection towards generative AI artworks: The “Clash” between US v. China and the implications for the European Union. LUP Student Papers https://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=9156575&fileOId=9156580
Lee, J. Y. (2021). Artificial intelligence cases in China: Feilin v. Baidu and Tencent Shenzhen v. Shanghai Yingxin. China and WTO Review, 211-222. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b61c/cb98fd748b7ee654895ee133d5363e4d8556.pdf
Lipszyc, D. (2017). Derecho de autor y derechos conexos. Ediciones Cerlalc-Unesco.
López-Tarruella, A. (2021). Derechos de autor e inteligencia artificial ¿Qué hacemos con los nuevos Rembrandts? En J. A. Murrillo Chávez (ed.), Estudios sobre propiedad intelectual. Temas actuales y nuevos desafíos (pp. 19-36). Gaceta Jurídica S.A.
Mazzi, F. (2024). Authorship in artificial intelligence-generated works: Exploring originality in text prompts and artificial intelligence outputs through philosophical foundations of copyright and collage protection. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 27(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12310
Mei, Y. (2024). Prompting the e-brushes: Users as authors in generative AI. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.11844
Midjourney (2024). Terms of Service. https://docs.midjourney.com/docs/terms-of-service
Militsyna, K. (2023). Human creative contribution to AI-based output – One just can(’t) get enough. GRUR International, 72(10), 939-949. https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikad075
Minaee, S., Mikolov, T., Nikzad, N., Chenaghlu, M., Socher, R., Amatriain, X. y Gao, J. (2024). Large language models: A survey. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.06196
Morales, A. (2021). El impacto de la inteligencia artificial en el Derecho. Advocatus, (039), 39-71. https://doi.org/10.26439/advocatus2021.n39.5117
Morgado, A. (2023). Anotaciones sobre el uso de inteligencia artificial para la creación de imágenes. https://amorgado.com/anotaciones_ia.pdf
Noy, S. y Zhang, W. (2023). Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence. Science, 381(6654), 187-192. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adh2586
Office of Governor Gavin Newsom (2024, 6 de septiembre). SB1047 Veto Message. California. https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/SB-1047-Veto-Message.pdf
Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual. (1886, 9 de septiembre). Convenio de Berna para la Protección de las Obras Literarias y Artísticas. https://www.oas.org/juridico/spanish/cyb_uru_Conv_Berna.pdf
Organización Mundial del Comercio. (1994). Acuerdo sobre los Aspectos de los Derechos de Propiedad Intelectual relacionados con el Comercio. En Acta Final de la Ronda Uruguay (Anexo 1C). https://www.wto.org/spanish/docs_s/legal_s/27-trips.pdf
Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual. (s.f.). Sobre la observancia de los derechos de propiedad intelectual. https://www.wipo.int/enforcement/es/
O’Toole, K. y Horvát, E.-Á. (2024). Extending human creativity with AI. Journal of Creativity, 34(2), 100080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2024.100080
OpenAI. (2024). GPT-4 Technical Report. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.08774
Osorio, F. (2022). Inteligencia artificial y derecho de autor: un estudio sobre la regulación británica. Revista Justicia & Derecho, 5(1):1-15. https://doi.org/10.32457/rjyd.v5i1.1833
Oxford University Press. (2024). Oxford learner's dictionaries. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/generic
Piskopani, A.-M., Chamberlain, A. y Ten Holter, C. (2023). Responsible AI and the arts: The ethical and legal implications of ai in the arts and creative industries. Conference: TAS '23: First International Symposium on Trustworthy Autonomous Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3597512.3597528
Radanliev, P. (2025). Artificial intelligence: Reflecting on the past and looking towards the next paradigm shift. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 37(7). https://doi.org/10.1080/0952813X.2024.2323042
Real Academia Española (2023). Genérico. En Diccionario de la lengua español (23.ª ed.), https://dle.rae.es/genérico
Sag, M. (2023). Copyright safety for generative AI. Houston Law Review, 61(2), 295-347. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4438593
Sánchez Ronceros, I. N. (2023). La implementación de la Inteligencia Artificial en las decisiones judiciales en procesos penales. Chornancap Revista Jurídica, 1(2), 37-51. https://doi.org/10.61542/rjch.43
Savchenko, V. y Tsvar, O. (2023). Issues of copyright for objects created by artificial intelligence. Baltic Journal of Legal and Social Sciences, (3), 69-77. https://doi.org/10.30525/2592-8813-2023-3-9
Thaler v Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039. United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (2025). https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2025/03/23-5233.pdf
Thaler v Perlmutter, 687 F. Supp. 3d 140. United States District Court for the District of Columbia. (2023). https://www.copyright.gov/ai/docs/district-court-decision-affirming-refusal-of-registration.pdf
Topsakal, O. y Akinci, T. C. (2023). Creating large language model applications utilizing langchain: A primer on developing LLM apps fast. International Conference on Applied Engineering and Natural Sciences, 1(1):1050-1056. https://doi.org/10.59287/icaens.1127
Torres, A. (2024). The ARTificial revolution: Challenges for redefining Art Education in the paradigm of generative artificial intelligence. Digital Education Review, (45), 84-90. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2024.45.84-90
Treder, M. S., Lee, S. y Tsvetanov, K. A. (2024). Introduction to large language models (LLMs) for dementia care and research. Frontiers in Dementia, 3:1385303 https://doi.org/10.3389/frdem.2024.1385303
United States Copyright Office. (2023a, 30 de agosto). Notice of inquiry: Artificial intelligence and copyright. https://www.copyright.gov/ai/docs/Federal-Register-Document-Artificial-Intelligence-and-Copyright-NOI.pdf
United States Copyright Office. (2025, 29 de enero). Copyright and artificial intelligence: Part 2 – Copyrightability. https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf
Vásquez, L. (2020). ¿Autoría algorítmica? Consideraciones sobre la autoría de las obras generadas por inteligencia artificial. Revista Iberoamericana de la Propiedad Intelectual, (13), 207-233. https://ojs.austral.edu.ar/index.php/ripi/article/download/483/674
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L. y Polosukhin, I. (2023). Attention is all you need. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762
Villalobos, J. (2021). La inteligencia artificial como gato de Schrödinger en el arte: ¿objeto y sujeto de derecho? Naturaleza y Libertad, Revista de Estudios Interdisciplinares, (15), https://doi.org/10.24310/NATyLIB.2021.vi15.12773
Villalobos, J. (2022). La autoría de la Inteligencia Artificial en el derecho español. Revista Justicia & Derecho, 5(1),1-19. https://doi.org/10.32457/rjyd.v5i1.1840
Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q. y Zhou, D. (2022). Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.11903
Yu, W., Yang, Z., Li, L., Wang, J. L., Liu, Z., Wang, X. y Wang, L. (2023). MM-Vet: Evaluating large multimodal models for integrated capabilities. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.02490
Yu, Z., He, L., Wu, Z., Dai, X. y Chen, J. (2023). Towards better chain-of-thought prompting strategies: A survey. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.04959
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Nuevo Derecho
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors should declare that the article is an original work that has not been totally or partially published in any print or electronic media, which has not been submitted simultaneously to another publication and that is not currently under evaluation in another publication. On the other hand, I leave (we) evidence that the statements made therein are the sole responsibility of the / the authors / is.
All data and references to already published material are properly identified with their respective credit and included in the bibliographical notes and appointments that stand out as such and, in cases that require it, I have the proper authorizations for those with the respective rights; in case of any dispute or claim relating to intellectual property rights, we take responsibility exonerating responsibility to Nuevo Derecho.
If the article is approved for publication, the authors transfer the copyright to the journal New law to publish, distribute electronic copies and included in indexing services, directories or databases of national and international data on Open Access under the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution-Noncommercial (CC bY-NC-SA) by which the authors retain their copyrights and allow them to others copy and distribute your work provided they recognize the corresponding authorship and the work is not used for purposes commercial.
Therefore, new law does not retain the rights to reproduce or copy (copyright), so the authors will have the final versions, to disseminate them in institutional repositories, personal blogs or any other electronic or print media, with the sole condition to make mention of the original source of publication, in this case Nuevo Derecho.
