The ongoing development and proliferation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents new challenges to many areas of law—copyright law is no exception. In particular, the question of allocating rights to works created with significant use of AI is highly topical and remains largely unresolved in many respects. Companies, creatives, investors, and developers alike are required to address the legal framework in order to identify risks and possibilities for structuring.
Clarifying the term: What are AI-generated works?
In the context of copyright law, AI-generated works are those results that are created—at least in part—under significant influence from Artificial Intelligence. Here, AI can act as an autonomous software solution or draw on extensive datasets to independently generate content such as texts, images, music, or audiovisual productions. Human involvement can vary, ranging from simply initiating a process to actively controlling and shaping the work.
Legal classification: Level of creativity and personal intellectual creation
Copyright requirements
According to German copyright law (§ 2 UrhG), protection is fundamentally tied to a personal intellectual creation. The significant creative contributions must come from a natural person. Works created purely automatically by algorithms often do not fulfill this requirement. The case law and literature explicitly emphasize that the creativity and individuality required by copyright law are fundamentally human in nature.
Who holds authorship when using AI?
In the context of AI-generated works, there is discussion as to the extent to which the human user’s input, such as selecting data, designing prompts, or training the AI, can be considered a creative contribution. Depending on the facts of the case, a human may be deemed the author if they have a formative and determining influence on the work. However, if human involvement is limited to a minimum and significant creative steps are taken autonomously by the AI, it is questionable whether copyright protection applies at all.
Ownership with complete AI autonomy
If works are created entirely by AI—i.e., automatically and without substantial human input—current law stipulates that there is no copyright protection. Rights to such content cannot be assigned, inherited, or exploited in the usual way. This can be a significant source of uncertainty, particularly for companies that rely on the exclusive use of such works.
Implications for companies and creative professionals
Usage and licensing issues
The use of AI-generated content can lead to further complex situations: for example, if AI is trained on copyright-protected works, the question arises as to whether this already constitutes use of third-party rights. Possible consequences could include claims by original authors or rights holders against users and developers of the AI. The handling of training data and precise documentation of the processes thus become crucially important.
Challenges in protecting AI results
Companies that use AI tools to create new business ideas or artistic content should bear in mind that, without human input in the output, traditional copyright does not apply. This may complicate the safeguarding of business models that depend on exclusivity or protection against imitation. If necessary, alternative protection mechanisms such as competition law or specific contractual arrangements may be considered.
Collaborations and liability allocation
Since the development and use of AI often take place within the framework of cooperation between companies, developers, and clients, contractual rights and obligations must be clearly defined. Issues of liability for potential legal violations—for instance, in the case of unauthorized use of protected content in training datasets—must be carefully addressed and require tailored solutions for each individual case.
International perspectives and ongoing developments
Current legal situation in Europe
While both German and European law still strictly adhere to the requirement of human creation, there is international discussion about potential adaptations to copyright law. In some countries, such as the United Kingdom, there are special provisions to also protect machine-generated works; however, their scope of application is limited and subject to numerous specific conditions.
Reform considerations and legal trends
As generative AI advances, political and societal pressure is mounting to create new solutions for emerging legal issues. Ongoing legislative initiatives—such as those at the European Union level within the framework of the AI Act or in the context of planned copyright reforms—should be closely monitored. Decisions by national and international courts could also provide essential impetus for future legal developments. However, it should be noted that many proceedings have not yet been finally decided and the legal situation is therefore still evolving.
Conclusion
The legal assessment and allocation of copyright protection to AI-generated works remains fraught with significant uncertainty. The decisive factor is the respective degree of human creativity. Specific cases require thorough legal evaluation, particularly with regard to the inclusion of training data, cooperation partners, and exploitation chains. The legal framework is subject to continuous development and will require careful monitoring in the future.
If you have questions regarding the development, use, or exploitation of AI-based content, an individual legal analysis may be helpful. The contacts at MTR Legal Rechtsanwalt are available to provide advice on assessing the relevant aspects in each case.
