Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been around in the world for many years, initially as science fiction from a distant future and, currently, alongside us in everyday tasks. However, it had never been the trend it is now.
These days, social networks and the media are full of topics such as #IA, judicial decisions supported by #ChatGPT, hearings in the #Metaverse and even dinosaurs with professions, which not all of us assimilate at the same speed as innovation advances.
The truth is that human beings are creators, which has granted them Intellectual Property rights of use, benefit and enjoyment of their creations, which translates into being reputed as the father of their works, using and taking advantage of them at their convenience. This begs the question of whether AI should also be entitled to these qualities and rights that have been given to women, men and companies. In principle, in Colombia and in most countries, AI is not recognized as having any personality, authorship or rights, but only its owner, whether an individual or a legal entity.
In a practical exercise, after asking ChatGPT to answer, as an Intellectual Property attorney would do, who is the author of a work created with AI, it tells us:
“Generally speaking, moral authorship of a work produced by artificial intelligence is not attributed to a specific human author. However, there may be exceptions if the human contributed substantial creativity in the selection of software parameters or in the configuration of the AI. The law varies according to the country and the type of work in question.”
Thus, when, for example, a judge asks the AI to prepare a ruling, in addition to the fact that it will possibly lack the human, subjective and discretionary component, and will give an algebraically precise and objective answer, this decision may imply co-authorship and that we are granting judicial powers to the individuals who programmed the AI and to the legal entities with whom the developments were made, which could involve private interests in the administration of justice.
All this, added to equally serious issues on which AI ceases to be a tool and displaces the capabilities and functions of people who had been considered based on their merits; the digital divide for access; the doubt about the originality and novelty of the assets that it creates; the violation of people’s privacy; and the risk in the security of the data that is processed, among others.
Undoubtedly, AI will be increasingly incorporated into everyday life, so it is necessary to recognize the personal and professional challenges that this entails, in addition to taking care of the prerogatives and attributes that we provide to its developers with its adoption.