Should copyright be attributed to original literary and artistic works autonomously generated by AI? How will creators of original material be compensated when their works are used to train natural language generation models? Intellectual property reform in the age of AI is inevitable, and we need our voices to be heard. In this solo show: * How copyright in the age of AI is being discussed amongst governments and global organizations * Why copyright needs to be international * How Blockchain technology could be used to facilitate intellectual property management * Why we must allow the licensing of works in copyright for machine learning in order to combat bias and prejudice * How licensing could work in a new model This is the second in my AI episodes based on my new book, Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain, and Virtual Worlds: The Impact of Converging Technologies On Authors and the Publishing Industry. Check out previous episodes and resources on AI at www.TheCreativePenn.com/future *** In January 2020, a Chinese court ruled that an AI-written article would be protected by copyright. “The article’s articulation and expression had a ‘certain originality’ and met the legal requirements to be classed as a written work — thus it qualified for copyright protection.” [Venture Beat] At this stage, there are more questions than answers in the realm of AI and copyright law. During 2020, I’ve worked with Orna Ross, founder of the Alliance of Independent Authors, to prepare submissions for the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and for the UK Government on artificial intelligence and copyright. Some questions under discussion include: • Should copyright be attributed to original literary and artistic works that are autonomously generated by AI or should a human creator be required? • Should the use of the data subsisting in copyright works without authorization for machine learning constitute an infringement of copyright? • If the use of the data subsisting in copyright works without authorization for machine learning is considered to constitute an infringement of copyright, what would be the impact on the development of AI and on the free flow of data to improve innovation in AI? As you can imagine, we’ve had a challenge wrapping our creative brains around this area, but it is critically important for authors and the publishing industry. Intellectual property reform in the age of AI is inevitable, and we need our voices to be heard. Most author organizations and publishers have shown little interest in submissions like this, but assuming it will all work out for the best is not enough. If creative voices are not in the room when these issues are discussed, then stronger voices will dominate — and these may not benefit creators and rights-holders. Wherever you are in the world, consider investigating what your government is doing around AI and intellectual property, and get involved. This whole domain is in flux and I am not a copyright lawyer, so the following are merely ideas for consideration and further discussion.