Human, All Too Human: A Philosophical Investigation on Intellectual Property Rights for AI-Based Creativity

As generative AI continues to evolve, questions regarding its role in the creative process and the legal framework surrounding intellectual property rights are becoming increasingly pertinent. This chapter examines the implications of AI-generated inventions within the context of the TRIPS agreement, especially in light of the DABUS case, which raised fundamental debates about AI’s capacity for innovation and the ownership of created works. We explore the distinctions between various forms of creativity, as proposed by Margaret Boden, and investigate the philosophical and legal complications associated with AI’s outputs. Through this framework, we assess whether AI-generated inventions can genuinely be considered novel and non-obvious, and provide critical criteria for patentability. We introduce the concept of novelty as a supervenient property on the data from which AI learns, suggesting that true innovation may emerge only when AI is exposed to diverse and extensive datasets. Furthermore, we address the evolving nature of ownership in cases where iteratively developed AI systems contribute to creation, challenging conventional ideas about inventorship. By highlighting the complexities of AI’s interaction with creativity and IPR, this chapter aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on fostering a responsible and ethically grounded innovation ecosystem in the age of AI. Ultimately, we advocate for a re-evaluation of existing legal frameworks to accommodate the transformative impacts of AI-driven creativity, ensuring appropriate recognition and protection for human and machine-generated contributions.