Nani ni mmiliki wa sanaa ya AI? Uvuvi wa kina katika mamlaka, mali ya akili, na wajibu

In 2019, a robot capable of creating art was developed by Engineered Arts under the guidance of Aidan Meller. This innovation raised fascinating questions: what is art? And can something produced by a machine even be considered art? The robot, named Ai-Da, quickly gained attention for her eerie ability to create abstract and surreal images—some of which were labeled "self-portraits." She even has her own social media presence. At the time, the world watched in mild curiosity, intrigued but not alarmed. The conversation centered more on aesthetics and philosophical musings than on ownership. Nobody was too concerned about intellectual property rights or copyright laws.

robot capable of creating artrobot capable of creating artMimi ni mwanachama wa

Lakini jambo kuhusu maendeleo ni kwamba mabadiliko huzaa mabadiliko.

Ilikuwa haraka hadi 2022, wakati uwasilishaji wa ChatGPT ulibadilisha kila kitu. Ghafla, AI ya kuzalisha haikuwa tu demo ya teknolojia ya kushangaza; ilikuwa inapatikana kwa kila mtu—kutoka hobbyists kwa wataalamu kwa watumiaji wa kila siku. Nini ilionekana kama habari ya kuvutia ilionekana haraka kuwa nguvu ya kuharibu katika viwanda vya ubunifu. Sasa, mazungumzo mengi zaidi yanatokea, moja ambayo inachangia moja kwa moja katika vitanda vya kisheria na kimaadili: nani anamiliki sanaa iliyozalishwa na AI? Je, mali ya mtumiaji aliyehamasisha algorithm? Mwandishi ambaye aliandika nambari? Au kampuni ambaye anamiliki mfano? Na nini kuhusu wasanii ambao kazi za awali zilichukuliwa mafunzo kwa mifumo hii?

Studio Ghibli imefungwa katika mapambano ya IP

Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, CGDream, DALL·E, and Midjourney have completely redefined what it means to be an artist. With just a few lines of text, users can produce illustrations, paintings, and even animations that mimic the styles of established artists and studios. The controversy surrounding AI-generated images that mimic the distinctive aesthetic of Studio Ghibli has become a flashpoint in this larger debate.

CGDreamCGDream

Forum za mtandaoni na vyombo vya habari vya kijamii vimejaa kazi ya sanaa ya AI iliyoongozwa na Ghibli - baadhi yao ni ya kuaminika sana kwamba mashabiki wanachanganya kwa sanaa ya dhana isiyotolewa.

Mr. Chua, mwanasheria wa mali za kibinafsi, alielezea kwa The Straits Times kwamba "hakuna mtu anayeweza kudai haki za kipekee juu ya mtindo," akizungumzia precedent ya kisheria inayohusiana na mwimbaji Ed Sheeran, ambaye alikuwa amehukumiwa kwa madai ya kupiga nyimbo nyingine. Kesi hiyo iliondolewa kwa sababu maendeleo ya haraka - kama vile mtindo wa sanaa - haiwezi kuwa na haki za kisheria. Hata hivyo, hii haina maana kwamba wasanii hawana upinzani. Ikiwa maudhui ya AI yanayotokana na maudhui ya moja kwa moja ya mambo yaliyohifadhiwa na haki za kibinafsi (kama wahusika maalum au utaratibu wa awali), hiyo ni wakati mgogoro wa kisheria unapoanza.

Maelezo ya The Straits Times

Mchakato wa Ufuatiliaji wa Maadili

Kwa mojawapo ya studio za animation zilizopendwa zaidi ulimwenguni, wengi wa ubunifu wanatarajia Studio Ghibli itakuwa kiongozi katika kukabiliana na kuongezeka kwa sanaa ya AI. wasiwasi sio tu kuhusu utambulisho - ni juu ya kupunguzwa kwa kazi ya ubunifu. wasanii ambao kutumia miaka kufurahia kazi zao sasa wanashindana na mashine ambazo zinaweza kuiga mtindo wao katika sekunde, bila malipo, au idhini.

Kama vile OpenAI inakabiliwa na mashtaka ya kufundisha mifano ya lugha juu ya vifaa vya haki za kibinafsi bila ruhusa - kama vile moja kutoka kwa Scarlett Johansson, ambaye anasema sauti yake ilitumiwa kufundisha msaidizi wa sauti bila ruhusa yake - wasanii wa maonyesho wanahitaji uwajibikaji sawa.Ni nani wale mashahidi wawili wanaotajwa katika Ufunuo sura ya 11?

Hapa ni tatizo la msingi. Katika mamlaka nyingi, haki za kibinafsi zinatolewa tu kwa kazi zilizoundwa na binadamu. Kanuni hii ya kisheria iliongezeka katika kesi ya ajabu ya "selfie ya nguruwe", ambapo mchawi alitumia kamera ya mwimbaji kuchukua selfie. Mahakama ziliamua kwamba kwa sababu picha haikuundwa na binadamu, haikubaliki kwa haki za kibinafsi.

Kwa hiyo, ikiwa AI sio binadamu - na ikiwa hutoa kipengele cha sanaa kwa kujitegemea - basi nani anaweza kuwa mmiliki wa haki za uumbaji huo?

Currently, many AI platforms state in their terms of service that users have rights to the content they generate. However, this is more of a policy stance than a legal one. The truth is, there’s still no global legal framework that definitively answers this question. And if we really dig deeper, another issue bubbles to the surface: the dataset. These AI systems are trained on millions (if not billions) of images scraped from the internet, often without the consent of the original creators. This includes everything from amateur sketches on DeviantArt to professional illustrations from licensed portfolios.

usersusers

Ikiwa AI inajifunza kuvutia "kama" msanii fulani kwa kuchambua maelfu ya kazi zao, je, hiyo ni ukatili au msukumo?

Uwanja wa Gray: Sheria, Utamaduni, na Ujao

Hivi sasa, makubaliano ya kisheria yanaelekea kuzingatia picha zilizoundwa na AI kama utajiri wa umma—ambayo inamaanisha hakuna mtu anayemiliki.Lakini hii inaweza kubadilika kwa sababu mashtaka yanaendelea na kama serikali zinaanza kuunda sheria mpya. Nchi zingine tayari zinachukua hatua za awali. Umoja wa Ulaya, kwa mfano, umeanzisha mapendekezo ya sheria za AI ambazo zina mahitaji ya uwazi kwa mifumo ya kuzalisha.

Hii inatuacha katika eneo la kijivu - aina ya limbo ya haki za kibinafsi ambapo watumiaji wanaamini wanamiliki kile wanachofanya, majukwaa yanadai wajibu mdogo, na wasanii wa asili hawana upatikanaji wowote.

Nini kitatokea baadaye?

The path forward is murky. Any meaningful solution will likely require an unprecedented level of international cooperation. After all, the internet doesn’t recognize borders, and neither does AI-generated content. For copyright laws to truly be effective in this space, they’ll need to be enforceable globally—a challenge that has never been successfully met before.

enforceableenforceable

Katika wakati huo, wasanii wanapigana nyuma kwa njia ambazo wanaweza: kwa njia ya mashtaka, kampeni za umma, na hata kwa kuunda data iliyoharibiwa ambayo inakaribisha jinsi mifumo ya AI inavyofundisha kazi yao.

Je, sanaa ya AI inakuwa nguvu ya demokrasia au nguvu ya uharibifu inategemea jinsi sisi, kama jamii, kuchagua kudhibiti.

This story was authored under HackerNoon’s Business Blogging Program.

This story was authored under HackerNoon’s Business Blogging Program.This story was authored under HackerNoon’s Business Blogging Program.Business Blogging Program