人工智能生成内容的著作权客体性思考——兼论作品判定的独创性标准选择

Reflection on the Objectivity of Copyright in AIGC:On the Selection of Originality Criteria in the Judgement of Works

以基于转换器的生成式预训练模型(GPT)为代表的高阶人工智能凭借其强大的智能型内容生成机制,使得内容产品生产中的技术占比不断上升,人的直接投入占比相对下降,传统著作权法作品的独创性要求、权利人本原则等基本理论受到冲击。面对人工智能生成内容(AIGC)可作品性问题,基于自然人智力投入的创造性本质理论和闭合性作品概念显得力不从心。在过程视角下(主观标准),人工智能内容生成过程符合人类创作的思维特征;在结果视角下(客观标准),人工智能生成内容具有著作权作品的外观形式和信息消费功能,符合著作权作品的本质属性。如果人为割裂人工智能生成内容与著作权作品在产生过程和实质作用上的同质关系,强行区分人工智能生成内容和自然人创作作品的法律性质,则有悖著作权法因应技术发展调整信息消费品利益的制度旨趣,最终将导致著作权法律秩序的混乱。

With its powerful and intelligent content generation mechanism,the advanced artificial intelligence repre-sented by generative pre-trained transformer(GPT)has led to a continuous increase in the proportion of technology in the production of content products,and a relative decrease in the proportion of direct human input,which pose a cha-llenge to basic theories of traditional copyright laws such as the originality requirement of works and the humanistic principle of rights of works.The theory of creative essence and the concept of closed works based on the intellectual input of natural individuals seem to be inadequate,when faced with the issue of workability of artificial intelligence generated content(AIGC).From the perspective of process(subjective criterion),the process of generating artificial intelligence content conforms to the thinking characteristics of human creation;from the perspective of results(objec-tive criterion),AIGC has the appearance form and information consumption function of copyrighted works,which are in line with the essential attributes of copyrighted works.If we artificially separate the homogeneous relationship be-tween AIGC and copyrighted works in the production process and substantive function,and forcibly distinguish the legal nature of artificial intelligence generated products and works created by natural individuals,we will go against the institutional purpose of copyright law to adjust the interests of information consumer goods in response to techno-logical development,which will ultimately lead to chaos in the legal order of copyright.