Within the broad field of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine learning (ML) looks at improving the performances of computers in executing tasks for which they were not specifically pre-programmed. Applied to Natural Language Processing (NLP), ML helps computers autonomously learn tasks such as the recognition, understanding and generation of natural language (i.e. the language spoken by humans). In other words, ML applied to NLP refers to the ability of humans to interact with computers in the same way humans interact among themselves.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is a disruptive technology that is widely adopted by members of the general public as well as scientists and technologists who are enthusiastic about the potential to accelerate research in a wide variety of fields. However, some professional artists, writers, and programmers fiercely object to using their creations as training data for generative AI systems and outputs that may compete with or displace their works. Lack of attribution and compensation for using their original creations are other sources of aggravation for critics of generative AI. 

Copyright lawsuits now underway in the United States and some other nations have substantial implications for the future of generative AI systems. If the plaintiffs prevail, the only generative AI systems that may be lawful in the United States would be those trained on public domain works or under licenses, which will affect everyone who deploys generative AI, integrates it into their products, and uses it for scientific research.

Music copyright

Music publishers Universal Music, ABKCO and Concord Publishing sued the AI company Anthropic in the Tennessee federal court, accusing it of misusing "innumerable" copyrighted song lyrics to train its chatbot, Claude. 

The lawsuit stated that Anthropic violates the publisher rights through its use of lyrics from at least 500 songs, ranging from the Beach Boys' God Only Knows and the Rolling Stones' Gimme Shelter to Mark Ronson and Bruno Mars' Uptown Funk and Beyoncé's Halo. This appears to be the first copyright case over AI's use of song lyrics.

Other copyright issues

Earlier, lawsuits were filed against Stability AI, Midjourney and DeviantArt. The lawsuit alleges direct copyright infringement, violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), vicarious copyright infringement related to forgeries, violation of class members' right of publicity, breach of contract related to the DeviantArt Terms of Service, and various violations of California's unfair competition laws. 

In a similar case, United States District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled that AI-generated artwork cannot be copyrighted. She was presiding over a lawsuit against the US Copyright Office after it refused copyright to Stephen Thaler for an AI-generated image made with the creativity Machine algorithm he created.

In light of these controversies, Grammy announced its copyright rules, allowing only human creators to curb AI use. 

Should AI be given copyrights?

The definition of authorship varies across nations. In the US, work will be protected by copyright law if it is original in that it is an independent creation and displays a modicum of creativity. The US Supreme Court in Feist stated this. Creativity in US copyright law seems to imply a human creator necessarily. Even though no definition of authorship is found in the law, it can be argued that the author will necessarily be a natural person under US law.  

A paper submitted by Maastricht University on "Robots ruling the (artistic) world?" states that the copyright rules will depend on the level of involvement. Where a computer program is a tool the user employs to produce a work, the user is the creator; there is a high level of creative input on his part. 

Likewise, programmers will be authors whose final product results from their intellectual endeavors: for example, the program displays an animation of fireworks whenever a button is pushed, and the creative input is from the programmer who created the animation rather than the user who pushes the button.