人工智能生成物著作权归属问题研究——谁有资格放弃《阳光失了玻璃窗》的版权?
|
摘要
"微软(亚洲)研究院是否有资格放弃微软小冰生成的《阳光失了玻璃窗》的版权"是人工智能时代对著作权保护制度提出的新课题。对该课题的回答取决于两个问题,即《阳光失了玻璃窗》是不是著作权法意义上的作品以及微软(亚洲)研究院是不是《阳光失了玻璃窗》的著作权人。人工智能虽能生成与众不同的表达,但缺乏自主产生创作思想的能力。基于此,《阳光失了玻璃窗》不应成为著作权法保护的作品,人工智能也不应被赋予拟制法律人格,否则将颠覆私法主客体不得相互转换的原理,更违背维护人类主体地位的伦理要求。微软(亚洲)研究院也无法从职务作品制度的角度成为《阳光失了玻璃窗》的著作权人,因而也就没有资格放弃《阳光失了玻璃窗》的版权。出于激励投资和繁荣文化创作的目的,邻接权制度或可为人工智能生成物提供法律规制,但仍有待立法者根据我国国情作出安排。
"Whether the Microsoft(Asia)Research Institute is eligible to give up the copyright of Sunshine Misses Windows generated by Microsoft Xiao Bing" is a new topic of copyright protection system in the era of artificial intelligence. The answer to this question depends on two questions, namely, whether Sunshine Misses Windows is a work in the sense of copyright law and whether Microsoft(Asia) Research Institute is the copyright owner of Sunshine Misses Windows. Although artificial intelligence can generate distinctive expressions, it lacks the ability to produce creative ideas. Based on this, Sunshine Misses Windows should not be a work protected by copyright law.Artificial intelligence should not be endowed with an artificial legal personality. Otherwise, it will subvert the principle that the subject and object of private law cannot be converted to each other, and it is contrary to the ethical requirement of maintaining the status of human subject. The Microsoft(Asia) Research Institute is also unable to become the copyright owner of Sunshine Misses Windows from the perspective of the woks for hire system, and thus is not qualified to give up the copyright of Sunshine Misses Windows. For the purpose of stimulating investment and flourishing cultural creation, the neighboring right system may provide legal regulation for artificial intelligence products, but it still needs to be arranged by the legislators according to China's national conditions.
"Whether the Microsoft(Asia)Research Institute is eligible to give up the copyright of Sunshine Misses Windows generated by Microsoft Xiao Bing" is a new topic of copyright protection system in the era of artificial intelligence. The answer to this question depends on two questions, namely, whether Sunshine Misses Windows is a work in the sense of copyright law and whether Microsoft(Asia) Research Institute is the copyright owner of Sunshine Misses Windows. Although artificial intelligence can generate distinctive expressions, it lacks the ability to produce creative ideas. Based on this, Sunshine Misses Windows should not be a work protected by copyright law.Artificial intelligence should not be endowed with an artificial legal personality. Otherwise, it will subvert the principle that the subject and object of private law cannot be converted to each other, and it is contrary to the ethical requirement of maintaining the status of human subject. The Microsoft(Asia) Research Institute is also unable to become the copyright owner of Sunshine Misses Windows from the perspective of the woks for hire system, and thus is not qualified to give up the copyright of Sunshine Misses Windows. For the purpose of stimulating investment and flourishing cultural creation, the neighboring right system may provide legal regulation for artificial intelligence products, but it still needs to be arranged by the legislators according to China's national conditions.
引文
[1]McCarthy J,Hayes PJ.Some philosophical problems from the stand point of artificial intelligence.[J].Machine Intelligence,1969(4):463-502.
[2]熊辉.人工智能发展到哪个阶段了[J].人民论坛,2018(2):14-16.
[3]腾讯研究院.人工智能时代:新闻业的谢幕与重生[EB/OL].(2017-06-21)[2018-12-23].http://www.tisi.org/4906.
[4]Jozuka Emiko.A Japanese AI Almost Won a Literary Prize[EB/OL].(2016-03-24)[2018-12-23].https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/wnxnjn/a-japanese-ai-almostwon-a-literary-prize.
[5]袁跃兴.人工智能技术能否代替文学创作[N].中国新闻出版广电报,2017-06-08(003).
[6]吴汉东.人工智能时代的制度安排与法律规制[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2017(5):128-136.
[7]石冠彬.论智能机器人创作物的著作权保护---以智能机器人的主体资格为视角[J].东方法学,2018(3):140-148.
[8]孙那.人工智能创作成果的可版权性问题探讨[J].出版发行研究,2017(12):17-19,61.
[9]易继明.人工智能创作物是作品吗?[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2017,35(5):137-147.
[10]王迁.论人工智能生成的内容在著作权法中的定性[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2017(5):148-155.
[11]黄先蓉.出版法规及其应用[M].苏州:苏州大学出版社,2013:39.
[12]杨澜.人工智能真的来了[M].南京:江苏凤凰文艺出版社,2017:177-192.
[13]姚志伟,沈燚.论人工智能创造物的著作权归属[J].湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018(3):29-33.
[14]HT Correspondent.Meet Sophia,the First Robot to be Granted Citizenship by Saudi Arabia[EB/OL].(2017-10-27)[2018-12-23].https://www.hindustantimes.com/worldnews/meet-sophia-the-first-robot-to-be-granted-citizenship-by-saudi-arabia/story-SCsczzwevIXCdMYrbHsTrI.html.
[15]May Bulman.EU TO VOTE ON DECLARING ROBOTSTO BE‘ELECTRONIC PERSONS’[EB/OL].(2018-07-27)[2018-12-23].https://www.independent.co.uk/lifestyle/gadgets-and-tech/robots-eu-vote-electronic-persons-european-union-ai-artificial-intelligencea7527106.html.
[16]Reuters.Robots could become'electronic persons'with rights,obligations under draft EU plan[EB/OL].(2016-06-21)[2018-12-23].https://www.cnbc.com/2016/6/21/robots-could-become-electronic-persons-with-rightsobligations-under-draft-eu-plan.html.
[17]Annemarie Bridy.The Evolution of Authorship:Work Made by Code[J].Columbia Journal of Law&the Arts,2016(9):39.
[18]袁曾.人工智能有限法律人格审视[J].东方法学,2017(5):50-57.
[19]刘宪权.人工智能时代的刑事风险与刑法应对[J].法商研究,2018,35(1):3-11.
[20]郭少飞.“电子人”法律主体论[J].东方法学,2018(3):38-49.
[21]Annemarie Bridy.Coding Creativity:Copyright and the Artificially Intelligent Author[J].Stanford Technology Law Review,2012(5):24-27.
[22]刘春田,刘波林.论职务作品的界定及其权利归属[J].中国人民大学学报,1990(6):61-69,98.
[23]熊琦.人工智能生成内容的著作权认定[J].知识产权,2017(3):3-8.
[24]潘宇翔.大数据时代的信息伦理与人工智能伦理---第四届全国赛博伦理学暨人工智能伦理学研讨会综述[J].伦理学研究,2018(2):135-137.
[25]郑戈.如何为人工智能立法[J].检察风云,2018(7):16-17.
[26]王利明.人工智能时代对民法学的新挑战[J].东方法学,2018(3):4-9.
[27]郝铁川.不可幻想和高估人工智能对法治的影响[EB/OL].(2018-01-03)[2018-12-23].http://www.legaldaily.com.cn/fxjy/content/2018-01/03/content_7438205.htm.
[28]Tim Collins For Mailonline.Experts in Europe are at loggerheads over‘electronic persons’legal status for robot[EB/OL].(2018-04-13)[2018-12-23].http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5612735/Experts-Europeloggerheads-electronic-persons-legal-status-robots.html.
[29]李扬,李晓宇.康德哲学视点下人工智能生成物的著作权问题探讨[J].法学杂志,2018(9):43-54.
[30]孙占利.智能机器人法律人格问题论析[J].东方法学,2018(3):10-17.
[31]陈艺芳.人工智能生成成果的法权化路径[J].西华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018(2):39-44.
[32]吴汉东,张平,张晓津.人工智能对知识产权法律保护的挑战[J].中国法律评论,2018(2):1-24.
[33]郑戈.人工智能与法律的未来[J].探索与争鸣,2017(10):78-84.
[34]陶乾.论著作权法对人工智能生成成果的保护---作为邻接权的数据处理者权之证立[J].法学,2018(4):3-15.
[35]滕锐.人工智能创作成果的著作权法保护[J].法治论坛,2018(3):44-55.
[36]罗祥,张国安.著作权法视角下人工智能创作物保护[J].河南财经政法大学学报,2017,(6):144-150.
[37]熊琦.著作权法中投资者视为作者的制度安排[J].法学,2010(9):79-89.
[38]孙新强.论作者权体系的崩溃与重建---以法律现代化为视角[J].清华法学,2014(02):130-145.
[39]卢海君.版权客体论(第二版)[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2014:2-3.
[40]李陶.媒体融合背景下报刊出版者权利保护---以德国报刊出版者邻接权立法为考察对象[J].法学,2016(4):99-110.
[41]刘洁.邻接权归宿论[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2013:24.
[42]梁慧星.电视节目预告表的法律保护与利益衡量[J].法学研究,1995(2):81-89.
[43]Shoyama R M.Intelligent Agents:Authors,Makers,and Owners of Computer-Generated Works in Canadian Copyright Law[J].Social Science Electronic Publishing,2015(4):129-140.
[44]Reilly T.Good Fences Make Good Neighboring Rights:The German Federal Supreme Court Rules on the Digital Sampling of Sound Recordings in Metall auf Metall[J].Minn.j.l.sci.&Tech,2012(13):190-191.
[45]郑思成.版权法[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2009:61.
[46]李菊丹.“人工智能创作物”有没有著作权[N].经济参考报,2018-04-04(008).
(1)蒋京洲.“小冰”们写诗,版权归谁?---人工智能时代的知识产权归属之困---人工智能时代的知识产权归属之困[EB/OL].(2017-07-07)[2018-12-23].https://c.m.163.com/news/a/COOP5PPO0514CT2S.html.
(2)思想无涉,即人工智能的内容生产没有思想、创造力、意志等作为创作来源。参见王迁.论人工智能生成的内容在著作权法中的定性[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2017,35(05):148-155.“目前的‘人工智能’本质上是应用‘人’的‘智能’,其生成内容的过程并不涉及创作所需的‘智能’,因此并不能成为受著作权法保护的作品。”
[2]熊辉.人工智能发展到哪个阶段了[J].人民论坛,2018(2):14-16.
[3]腾讯研究院.人工智能时代:新闻业的谢幕与重生[EB/OL].(2017-06-21)[2018-12-23].http://www.tisi.org/4906.
[4]Jozuka Emiko.A Japanese AI Almost Won a Literary Prize[EB/OL].(2016-03-24)[2018-12-23].https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/wnxnjn/a-japanese-ai-almostwon-a-literary-prize.
[5]袁跃兴.人工智能技术能否代替文学创作[N].中国新闻出版广电报,2017-06-08(003).
[6]吴汉东.人工智能时代的制度安排与法律规制[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2017(5):128-136.
[7]石冠彬.论智能机器人创作物的著作权保护---以智能机器人的主体资格为视角[J].东方法学,2018(3):140-148.
[8]孙那.人工智能创作成果的可版权性问题探讨[J].出版发行研究,2017(12):17-19,61.
[9]易继明.人工智能创作物是作品吗?[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2017,35(5):137-147.
[10]王迁.论人工智能生成的内容在著作权法中的定性[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2017(5):148-155.
[11]黄先蓉.出版法规及其应用[M].苏州:苏州大学出版社,2013:39.
[12]杨澜.人工智能真的来了[M].南京:江苏凤凰文艺出版社,2017:177-192.
[13]姚志伟,沈燚.论人工智能创造物的著作权归属[J].湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018(3):29-33.
[14]HT Correspondent.Meet Sophia,the First Robot to be Granted Citizenship by Saudi Arabia[EB/OL].(2017-10-27)[2018-12-23].https://www.hindustantimes.com/worldnews/meet-sophia-the-first-robot-to-be-granted-citizenship-by-saudi-arabia/story-SCsczzwevIXCdMYrbHsTrI.html.
[15]May Bulman.EU TO VOTE ON DECLARING ROBOTSTO BE‘ELECTRONIC PERSONS’[EB/OL].(2018-07-27)[2018-12-23].https://www.independent.co.uk/lifestyle/gadgets-and-tech/robots-eu-vote-electronic-persons-european-union-ai-artificial-intelligencea7527106.html.
[16]Reuters.Robots could become'electronic persons'with rights,obligations under draft EU plan[EB/OL].(2016-06-21)[2018-12-23].https://www.cnbc.com/2016/6/21/robots-could-become-electronic-persons-with-rightsobligations-under-draft-eu-plan.html.
[17]Annemarie Bridy.The Evolution of Authorship:Work Made by Code[J].Columbia Journal of Law&the Arts,2016(9):39.
[18]袁曾.人工智能有限法律人格审视[J].东方法学,2017(5):50-57.
[19]刘宪权.人工智能时代的刑事风险与刑法应对[J].法商研究,2018,35(1):3-11.
[20]郭少飞.“电子人”法律主体论[J].东方法学,2018(3):38-49.
[21]Annemarie Bridy.Coding Creativity:Copyright and the Artificially Intelligent Author[J].Stanford Technology Law Review,2012(5):24-27.
[22]刘春田,刘波林.论职务作品的界定及其权利归属[J].中国人民大学学报,1990(6):61-69,98.
[23]熊琦.人工智能生成内容的著作权认定[J].知识产权,2017(3):3-8.
[24]潘宇翔.大数据时代的信息伦理与人工智能伦理---第四届全国赛博伦理学暨人工智能伦理学研讨会综述[J].伦理学研究,2018(2):135-137.
[25]郑戈.如何为人工智能立法[J].检察风云,2018(7):16-17.
[26]王利明.人工智能时代对民法学的新挑战[J].东方法学,2018(3):4-9.
[27]郝铁川.不可幻想和高估人工智能对法治的影响[EB/OL].(2018-01-03)[2018-12-23].http://www.legaldaily.com.cn/fxjy/content/2018-01/03/content_7438205.htm.
[28]Tim Collins For Mailonline.Experts in Europe are at loggerheads over‘electronic persons’legal status for robot[EB/OL].(2018-04-13)[2018-12-23].http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5612735/Experts-Europeloggerheads-electronic-persons-legal-status-robots.html.
[29]李扬,李晓宇.康德哲学视点下人工智能生成物的著作权问题探讨[J].法学杂志,2018(9):43-54.
[30]孙占利.智能机器人法律人格问题论析[J].东方法学,2018(3):10-17.
[31]陈艺芳.人工智能生成成果的法权化路径[J].西华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018(2):39-44.
[32]吴汉东,张平,张晓津.人工智能对知识产权法律保护的挑战[J].中国法律评论,2018(2):1-24.
[33]郑戈.人工智能与法律的未来[J].探索与争鸣,2017(10):78-84.
[34]陶乾.论著作权法对人工智能生成成果的保护---作为邻接权的数据处理者权之证立[J].法学,2018(4):3-15.
[35]滕锐.人工智能创作成果的著作权法保护[J].法治论坛,2018(3):44-55.
[36]罗祥,张国安.著作权法视角下人工智能创作物保护[J].河南财经政法大学学报,2017,(6):144-150.
[37]熊琦.著作权法中投资者视为作者的制度安排[J].法学,2010(9):79-89.
[38]孙新强.论作者权体系的崩溃与重建---以法律现代化为视角[J].清华法学,2014(02):130-145.
[39]卢海君.版权客体论(第二版)[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2014:2-3.
[40]李陶.媒体融合背景下报刊出版者权利保护---以德国报刊出版者邻接权立法为考察对象[J].法学,2016(4):99-110.
[41]刘洁.邻接权归宿论[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2013:24.
[42]梁慧星.电视节目预告表的法律保护与利益衡量[J].法学研究,1995(2):81-89.
[43]Shoyama R M.Intelligent Agents:Authors,Makers,and Owners of Computer-Generated Works in Canadian Copyright Law[J].Social Science Electronic Publishing,2015(4):129-140.
[44]Reilly T.Good Fences Make Good Neighboring Rights:The German Federal Supreme Court Rules on the Digital Sampling of Sound Recordings in Metall auf Metall[J].Minn.j.l.sci.&Tech,2012(13):190-191.
[45]郑思成.版权法[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2009:61.
[46]李菊丹.“人工智能创作物”有没有著作权[N].经济参考报,2018-04-04(008).
(1)蒋京洲.“小冰”们写诗,版权归谁?---人工智能时代的知识产权归属之困---人工智能时代的知识产权归属之困[EB/OL].(2017-07-07)[2018-12-23].https://c.m.163.com/news/a/COOP5PPO0514CT2S.html.
(2)思想无涉,即人工智能的内容生产没有思想、创造力、意志等作为创作来源。参见王迁.论人工智能生成的内容在著作权法中的定性[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2017,35(05):148-155.“目前的‘人工智能’本质上是应用‘人’的‘智能’,其生成内容的过程并不涉及创作所需的‘智能’,因此并不能成为受著作权法保护的作品。”