Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro Research Article Legal Issues of Artificial Intelligence Ae Generated Works: Challenges on Indonesian Copyright Law Ranti Fauza Mayana1*.
Tisni Santika2.
Yin Yin Win3.
Jamil Adrian Khalil Matalam4 .
Ahmad M Ramli5 1,5Faculty of Law.
Universitas Padjajaran.
Indonesia 2Faculty of Law.
Universitas Pasundan.
Indonesia 3MacMilan Center.
Yale University.
United States of America 4School of Law.
University of Southeastern Philippines.
Philippines *ranti.
fauza@unpad.
ABSTRACT
Digital transformation fosters the massive utilization of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in creating literary, artistic, and musical works worldwide, including in Indonesia.
The autonomous functioning of AI challenges the essential presumption that technology is merely a device in the hands of humans in the creation process of Works.
This paper examines several legal issues and problems concerning the copyright-ability, authorship, and ownership of AI-generated works using a juridical normative approach.
The result of the analysis shows that although the framework of Indonesia's copyright law is based on the principle of human authorship, the rapid development of AI must be balanced with an accommodating legal framework.
In conclusion, the Indonesian government can open up the possibility of accepting AI's role in the creation of the work and formulate the limited artificial legal personhood of AI by granting exclusive rights, copyright protection, moral rights, and economic rights to individuals or groups of individuals who produce AI or whose contribution is required for AI function.
This formulation is expected to encourage the utilization of AI also provide legal certainty and solve the problem concerning the lack of legal accountability for AI-generated works.
In addition, the advancement of technical and legal support is needed in implementing this provisioning model.
Keywords: Artificial Intelligence.
Authorship.
Copyright.
Legal Personhood.
INTRODUCTION
The Furthermore, the massive development technology and globalization fostered the creation transformation which has brought major changes of technology called Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a in activities, lifestyles, and even creative field of study related to capturing, modelling, and Digital media became the preferred storing human intelligence in a technology media in the creative processes including the system, information so that the system can realization and manifestation of creative works facilitate decisionAemaking processes that are because of its ease, effectiveness, and wide usually carried out by humans.
reach (Mayana, & Santika, 2.
The extensive Professor John McCarthy, a computer use of information technology has changed how scientist, known as the AuFather of AIAy pioneered society processes the creation of works.
the research on Artificial Intelligence in 1955 Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro (Andersen, 2.
AI is machines that perform to be performed by humans because it requires intelligence-required tasks.
A machine can be cognitive abilities such as making textual works considered artificially intelligence if it performs and composing melodies and song compositions errands that people perform utilizing knowledge like perception, discussion, and direction.
Rule- (Tektona.
Sari, & Alfaris, 2.
AI systems based expert systems were the first AI systems.
already become participants in certain social AI is a field of computer science devoted to the relations.
AI technologies "are capturing" not only study of the automation of intelligent behaviour or business but also the social sphere: education, a subfield of computer science devoted to the creation of software and hardware that can fully relations (Nobile C, 2.
replicate some of the functions of the human technological developments that have occurred.
In principle.
AI is designed to create a tool AI has also experienced very significant to help human activities in the form of tools that developments where the Generative AI system is can think like humans.
This assumption has not used only as a tool for humans to facilitate changed drastically with recent advances in AI their work.
Many modern Artificial Intelligence that can generate new content in ways that systems are now capable of producing artistic cannot be distinguished anymore from human In these systems, a computer pictures/paintings In line with the program simply follows a set of specific The utilization of AI in the creation process instructions about how to act in a certain has brought an impact on the Copyright system Recent advancement in AI enables where the use of AI has also penetrated object more sophisticated functions where AI uses algorithms to learn from data and develop (Christiani.
Qureshi, & Kosasih, 2.
for solutions for certain problems (Scharre, & example in creating music and songs as well as Horowitz, 2.
Today.
AI technology allows making works of art.
Computer programs computers to be actively involved in human currently have algorithm engines that enable AI to decision-making and can even enable computers analyze the input data and make decisions both to make decisions without human involvement under supervision and independently.
In addition, (Anggraini, 2.
AI can express works made from previous works Copyright.
The Industrial Revolution brought in an era of art in various forms, including Traditional of automation that requires insignificant human Cultural Expressions (TCE.
(Dharmawan et al.
The popularity and development of AI now show that AI is increasingly capable of The types of AI are generally divided based performing functions that were originally only able on the level of advancement (Kaminski, 2.
Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro Generally, the types of AI consist of: Artificial of regulatory and legislative measures that Narrow Intelligence (ANI), which refers to weak accommodate the preventive and evaluative AI that primarily focuses on one single narrow mechanism (Astariyani et al, 2.
task with a limited range of abilities.
Artificial An example of strong AI where input data General Intelligence (AGI), which refers to AI from various kinds of works / which are that on the level of thinking as a human and derivatives of works that are inputted into the hypothetically can perform varied tasks.
Artificial system, where humans only act as programmers Super Intelligence (ASI), refers to AI technology who input data and enter algorithms which are that .
lso hypotheticall.
will match and then then AI will process orders and produce the surpass the human mind.
In short.
AI is implementation of these orders into real output categorized as weak if it simply performs (Ng, & Leung, 2.
The advertising project titled programmed functions through simulation, and AI AuThe Next RembrandtAy was ordered by ING Bank is categorized as strong if it goes beyond these to J.
Walter Thompson, an advertising agency in functions by thinking and creating autonomously.
In this project.
AI analyzes 346 paintings by .
e Myntaras, 2.
Dutch painter.
Rembrandt van Rijn, who is one of The vast development of AI fosters the the greatest painters in European art history.
The revolution in the production of literary, artistic, and utilization of AI in this project succeeded in musical works that have been generated in some concluding that if Rembrandt were still alive shape or form by AI due to the recent today, he would most likely have painted a man advancements in AI that can generate new aged 30-40 years, wearing a black shirt and hat content in ways that cannot be distinguished and posing from the right side.
This project shows anymore from human craftsmanship (Guadamuz, that once the AI program analyzed the style of The term "Generative AI" refers to Rembrandt from the input of the painter's 364 computational techniques that are capable of paintings, the program then created a new, generating seemingly new, meaningful content creative, independent, and original work of art.
such as text, images, or audio from training data.
(Yanisky-Ravid, 2.
AuThe Next RembrandtAy For this reason, generative AI has the potential to advertising project went on to win more than 60 transform the process that relies on creativity, advertising awards, including the prestigious innovation, and knowledge processing (Euchner.
Cannes Lions (Westhoff, 2.
The vast development of AI also become a There are numerous examples other than reminder to reflect and evaluate the quality of the aforementioned advertising project titled AuThe regulatory and legislative measures in Indonesia.
Next RembrandtAy.
First, regarding the copyright that according to the research of Astariyani, et.
of AuZarya of the DawnAy, on September 15, 2022, in need of improvement in the terms of the quality Kristina Kashtanova submitted a copyright Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro application for the Work in the form of a comic the Works (Sans, 2.
However, because the book under her name.
The US Copyright Office images in the Work that were generated by the AI reviewed the application and registered the (Midjourney technolog.
are not the product of copyright registration for the work under human authorship.
The US Copyright Office (United cancelled the original certificate issued to Ms States Copyright Office, 2023.
Shortly after Kashtanova and issued a new certificate covering registering the work, the US Copyright Office the limited copyright registration only for the became aware of statements on social media that expressive material that she authored/created.
attributed Kashtanova to using MidjourneyAs AI in The authors argue that the casuistic approach creating the comic book, whereas the application concerning the utilization of AI is needed did not disclose the use of AI.
The US Copyright concerning the development of Generative AI.
Office then determined that the application was acknowledgement Ms KashtanovaAs creative erroneous or at least incomplete in content.
In a effort in creating the stories, conducting the letter dated 28 October 2022, the US Copyright selection and arrangement of the AI-generated Office informed Ms Kashtanova that it intended to images as the Aumodicum human creativityAy and cancel the registration unless she provided the decision of The US Copyright Office to issue a additional information in writing explaining why new certificate covering the limited copyright the US Copyright Office should not cancel her registration only for the expressive material that registration (United States Copyright Office, authored by the legal subject can be the important Kashtanova responded with a letter that milestone in searching the intersection between describes specific information about the creation human creativity and the utilization of advance of the work AuZarya of the DawnAy where she technology in the context of copyright.
VAu001480196 authored every aspect of the work while The second example is AuEdmond de Midjourney served merely as the supporting tool.
BelamyAy a painting that was sold in an auction for thus Ms Kashtanova argued that portions of the USD 432,500 on 25 October 2018 at ChristieAs in work shall be protected because she authored the New York (ChristieAs, 2.
The painting is one text and the overall Work is copyrightable due to of a group of portraits of the fictional AuBelamy FamilyAy created by Obvious, a Paris-based arrangement of the text and images as the collective consisting of Hugo Caselles-Dupry.
The US Copyright Office conducted Pierre Fautrel, and Gauthier Vernier (Goenaga, the review of the work and application.
The review They are taken part in investigating the concluded that Ms Kashtanova is the writer of the connection point between craftsmanship and text as well as the choice, coordination, and game man-made consciousness, and their strategy plan of the composed and visual components of goes by the abbreviation GAN, which represents Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro AGenerative Adversarial NetworkA, one of the deep utilization of these AI tools combines with a learning technologies that can create abstract significant amount of human intervention or not, in images used to create AuObvious ArtAs ProjectAy case there is a significant amount of human (Purba, & Hendry, 2.
In this case, the authors intervention, it can be argued that the creativity argue that the collective goal of the AuBellamy exist, on contrary, if the human contribution FamilyAy creation was to prove that machines can considered to be insignificant then there will be no also be creative, from the Copyright point of view, although computer programs can be protected by Numerous creators are using generative AI copyright, the creation of computer program is not to supplement, edit, inspire, or even replace necessarily copyrightable since the copyright of several steps of their works (United States the work is separate of any material/tools that Copyright Office, 2023.
may be used to create that work.
However, the generative AI can result in the work as the output AuObvious ArtAs Project as an ensemble could be that is potentially generated with insignificant protected as a work of art/compilation although human control, contribution, and creativity and the each portrait generated by the AuGenerative AI system autonomously creates the work.
In this Adversarial NetworkA is not protected by case, the work is ineligible for copyright At the other end of the spectrum, the The utilization of Another example is the utilization of AI in creators may have complex interactions with music production.
Jukebox is an open-source generative AI to create the fixation of a creative neural network tool that generates music and vision and incorporate the result into advanced rudimentary singing as raw audio in multiple In short, a wide variety of other utilization genres and styles of many artists, including the that combines human and generative authorship late Elvis Presley (Guadamuz, 2.
Through is possible and occurring.
The authorsA standpoint massive combination models.
Jukebox can of all of the cases is that the utilization of AI produce coherent, highly realistic, and diverse cannot fully diminish human creativity therefore, songs as well as shape the style of music and the casuistic approach and assessment are There is also Google AI, a division of important in deciding whether a certain work can Google that focuses on AI and has released be the subject of copyright protection.
In addition, products such as Magenta and Nsynth as deeper analysis and a progressive approach to products that are made to aid artists and copyright law are needed to address this matter.
composers in creating music with the help of AI.
Initially, intellectual property protection Concerning the utilization of AI in music comes from the result of human mind activities in production, the author addressed the importance creating useful products and/or processes, of conducting the assessment of whether the (Disemadi, 2022.
Rifqi.
Roisah, & Lestari, 2.
Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro however, the ability of AI, especially strong AI to to the basic principles of Copyright protection:
produce creative works makes AI systems originality, creativity .
and fixation.
inevitably become an indispensable part of Originality means that copyright protection can be human activities, such symbiosis and cooperation granted to work that consists of the form of between AI and humans that will lead to the creativity as the result of oneAs creation.
The condition described by Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel originality principle lies based on human Prize Winner in Economic Sciences, as the intellectual creation.
Therefore, there must be a Autransformation of civilizationAy (Stiglitz, 2.
This strong relation between the creation and the transformation in the creation of works raises creator .
egal subjec.
, in other words, based on several challenges in Indonesian Copyright Law the personality theory of copyright, the originality concerning the copyright-ability and authorship of and personality of the creation arise from the AI-generated works.
Ryan Abbott argues that to increase the copyrightable work and the .
person as the level of human well-being, the law must not make Further, the fixation principle implies that the distinction between human activity and that of a work is entitled to a copyright if it has been artificial intelligence when people and artificial stated in concrete form, not in the form of an idea.
intelligence perform the same function and task in In the conventional approach, these 3 .
creating the works (Abbot, 2.
However, approaches are attached to legal persons .
uman according to the legal personality theory, to be a or legal entitie.
legal person is to be the subject of rights and The gap between these 3 .
basic obligations, to confer legal rights or to impose principles of Copyright that emphasishe the legal obligations, therefore, is to confer legal human-centric approach which excludes AI from personality (Dewi, 2.
This approach is the scope of legal subjects and the advanced adopted by copyright law, therefore the human- development of Generative AI where it can centric approach can be found in Copyright Law.
produce works produced by humans brought Based on the legal personality theory.
AI systems do not possess any legal personality of civil law copyright-ability, nor have a special legal position in most national accountability of AI-generated works legal systems (Filipova, & Koroteev 2.
Previous Guadamuz including Indonesia, thus, the advancement of AI (Guadamuz, raises several challenges to Indonesian Copyright Law.
advancements and emphasizes the importance of The advancement of AI brings the legal acknowledging the irreversible emergence of AI in consequences of Copyright due to the challenges human life, thus legal systems must adapt and Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro offer equitable solutions to copyright holders while Copyright Law using a progressive approach and fostering technological advancement.
Several elaborate on some potential solutions to the issue perspectives of Copyright Law were also of authorship, copyright-ability and ownership of presented in earlier studies, for example study AI-generated works and the AuartificialAy legal from Hristov analyzed this issue from the personality of AI.
perspective of the U.
Copyright Act and proposed that instead of redefining AuauthorshipAy to RESEARCH METHODS include non-humans, it is simpler to reinterpret the The study uses a normative juridical terms of AuemployeeAy and AuemployerAy in the made The laws, regulations, theories and for hire doctrine (Hristov, 2.
A Study from legal principles of copyright especially concerning Chakraborty elaborates on analysis of Authorship authorship, copyright-ability and ownership of AI- of AI-generated Works under the Indian Copyright generated works are analyzed to examine the Act 1957.
the study concludes that in the absence challenges and potential solutions in balancing of having the legal capacity to claim remedies for copyright infringement.
AI cannot be considered development of AI innovation.
Both an analytical as an author and the argument of extending and deductive approach have been employed in copyright protection to AI-generated works will fail determining the most effective solution to the (Chakraborty, 2.
A Study from Ramli, et.
copyright legal issues of AI-generated works.
The analyzes Artificial Intelligence as an object of Indonesian intellectual property in Indonesian Law and technology-related regulations, legal cases which questions whether AI can be qualified as a legal have set copyright precedents and published subject of creator, inventor or designer and then articles on non-human creativity and innovation registered as intellectual property (Ramli et al, have been analyzed, and several solutions and A Study from Christiani.
Qureshi, and recommendations have been formulated as a Kosasih analyzes who can be categorized as the Copyright subject of rights owners in AI and whether IndonesiaAs Copyright Law accommodate the RESULTS AND DISCUSSION rights of creators in the form of AI as copyrighted Legal Issues of Artificial Intelligence Ae works (Christiani.
Qureshi, & Kosasih 2.
Generated Work: Some Challenges on Novel to the previous research, this article Indonesian Copyright Law attempts to examine several legal challenges copyright-ability.
Copyright-ability of Artificial Intelligence Ae Generated Works ownership and accountability of AI-generated Article 1.
2 Indonesia Copyright Law defines works from the perspective of Indonesian an author as a person or several persons who Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro individually or jointly produce works that are references for Generative AI.
In the multi-faceted unique and personal.
This definition shows world of copyright law, the terms transformative human-centric approach to Indonesia Copyright and derivative works often create confusion since Law.
This means that itAs the author/creator both refer to the adaptation or modification of an makes the creative choices and as such, infuses original work.
However, there is a principal his / her personality into a given work differentiation of both works.
A work is considered (Chakraborty, 2.
The authors expostulate that AutransformativeAy if it adds something new to the in a human-centred approach, the principle of original with a further or different character, in originality is linked to a Anatural person and the short, the work has transformed the content in requirement of Auintellectual creationAy addressing such a way that it imparts a new meaning or the personality of the authors.
Thus, for this message, differing from the original.
The reason, the works autonomously produced by Auderivative work is a work based on or derived non-human (Artificial Intelligenc.
might not be from one or more already existing works including eligible for copyright protection based on Indonesia Copyright Law.
picture versions of literary material or plays, art AuWorkAy or AuCreationAy in the provision of the reproductions, abridgements and condensations Indonesian Copyright Law is defined as the work of preexisting works.
in the fields of science, art, and literature.
The copyright-ability of Works based on produced based on inspiration, ability, thought.
Indonesian copyright law relies on several factors, imagination, dexterity, creativity, or expertise and especially the criteria of originality and the must be fixated in concrete form (Roisah, & involvement of creativity in work creation, thus the Rakhmi, 2.
Article 40 verse .
letter n analysis relates to the classification of AI that is Indonesian Copyright states that protected work used to create AI-generated works.
In case AI is includes Works in science, art, and literature used merely as a tool of human to create work that fulfils the degree of originality and creativity that is dominantly part of the human contribution, modifications arrangements, and other works for example, the utilization of Microsoft Word to resulting from the transformation.
write a novel, then the novelist considered as the The authors argue that the works resulting author of the work (Chakraborty, 2.
or the from the transformation and derivative works play utilization of recorder to record the music and an important element in analyzing the copyright- lyric, the composer/songwriter will be considered ability of Artificial Intelligence Ae Generated Works as the author and/or copyright holder due to the based on the potential portion of utilization of significant involvement of human contribution in existing copyrighted works as the input or creating the works.
The computer and recorder as Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro AI technology cannot be considered as the author originality and is a form of creativity if it is the since they are only the tools in the hands of result of one's creation, even though it may be humans and thus will not be able to discharge inspired by the work of other people.
The fixation legal responsibilities.
The legal rationale of this principle implies that a work is entitled to a conventional approach is according to legal copyright if it has been stated in concrete form, personality theory.
Gray defines a legal person as not in the form of an idea.
The originality principle Auany being to whom the law attributes a capacity in Indonesia Copyright Law is interpreted as the of interests and, therefore, of legal rights and author's intellectual creation, in other words, duties (Gray, 1.
In addition, to be a legal according to the personality theory of copyright, person is to be the subject of rights and the originality and personality of the creation arise obligations, to confer legal rights or to impose from the relationship between the act of creating legal obligations, therefore, is to confer legal copyrightable work and the person acting as the personality, thus the incapability of AI to bear As a consequence, when there is no legal responsibilities makes AI .
n this case weak natural .
person behind a work, there is no AI like computer and recorder cannot be originality and personality, and copyright cannot considered as the legal subject based on exist (Maggiore, 2.
Copyright Law.
In addressing the originality of the works.
Nevertheless, the involvement of the creativity process and the Microsoft Word and recorder, the advancement of role of AI in performing the creativity process AI technology enables the AI to operate must be examined.
in this matter, transparency is autonomously to a certain degree in creating the undoubtedly one of the most fundamental pillars Further, the work created by AI is largely and central importance (De Werra, 2.
due to indistinguishable from work created by humans the issue connected with the creation and right to (Naithani, 2.
In the case of advanced AI, responsibility for safeguarded works emerges there is little or no creative input from a human, at when those works reflect creative choices most, the human chooses certain data in the attributable to AI.
The dilemma arises from the data-feeding process then AI autonomously human-centric conception of copyright law that is processes the data to generate an output without structured around the idea that only human further intervention / direct role of the human in beings are the source of creativity and may providing creative input and process.
produce original works in a copyright sense.
According to Indonesia Copyright Law, the Copyright-ability.
Authorship and Ownership of AI-generated Works requirements, namely originality, creativity, and The ability to be creative has always been Work can be said to have an element of a big part of what separates human beings from Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro Based on this principle, normatively, or potentially recorded in the General register of Article 1.
Copyright means an exclusive right of fills in as the creator / the author.
According to the author, further Article 1.
Indonesian Article 37, unless proven otherwise, in the event a Copyright Law defines the creator as a person or legal entity makes publication, distribution, or group of people who individually or jointly produce communication of works originating from the legal entity without citing any person as the Author, the These provisions describe that the one who will be regarded as the author is the unique and personal characteristics of the work legal entity.
In addition.
Article 39 states that if the are the result of the creative process of the Author of Works is unknown and the Works have creator, therefore a person who creates original not been published, the copyright of the Works works of authorship is granted the exclusive but will be held by the State for the benefit of the not absolute- rights to do anything about his / her Author.
creation, for example, the right to produce, copy.
The qualification of copyright subject to a legal person is considering that based on Article 4 commercialization to gain economic benefit of Indonesian Copyright Law, copyright embodies (Mayana, & Santika 2.
both economic and moral rights.
Further.
Article 5 However today, a new generation of AI regulates that moral rights are the rights that are applications is casting doubt on how the eternally inherent to the author consisting of the Copyright Law defines the subject since AI is right to integrity and the right to paternity being used in applications across sectors.
AI is (Yudiana, 2.
Related to the exercise of rights, creating artistic, musical, and literary works.
This Article 5 verse .
regulates the exercise of moral raised a question since Article 1.
2 and Article 1.
rights as transferable by testament or other Indonesian Copyright Law restrict the scope of reason by the provisions of laws and regulations author/creator/copyright holder to a person .
egal after their demise, according to the Indonesian person Ae covers both human and legal entit.
law both the testator and beneficiary must be a Further.
Article 1.
27 of Indonesian Copyright Law legal person.
Regarding the exercise of economic explains that "person" includes individuals rights, article 9 .
regulates that every person .
or legal entities who are eligible to be the .
xcept the author and/or copyright holde.
who holders of rights and obligations in their capacity exercises the economic rights is obligated to as legal subjects.
obtain permission from the author or the copyright Article 31 of Indonesian Copyright Law These provisions regarding the exercise of regulates that unless proven otherwise, the one to copyright limit the subject to a person, defined as be considered as the creator is the individual a legal person .
oth person and legal entit.
whose name is expressed in progress recordation Articles 66 and 67 of Indonesian Copyright Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro Law regulate that the recordation of Works for Law regulates that if the Works have been copyright and related rights products is filled with recorded, other interested parties may file a written application in the Indonesian language by lawsuit for cancellation of recordation of the the author, copyright holder and related rights Works in the public register of Works through the owner or several persons who are jointly entitled Commercial Court, and the lawsuit is addressed to the Works or related rights product or their to the author and/or the legally registered representative to the Minister of Law and Human copyright holder The author, copyright holders, or Rights of the Republic Indonesia.
If the the related rights owners are entitled to file a application is filled by several people who are claim for damages to the Commercial Court for jointly entitled to the Works or related rights infringement of copyright or related rights products, all the applicantsA names must be products (Nurhayati et al, 2.
If the application is filled by legal entities.
Copyright subjects consist of creators, the application will be enclosed with a certified copyright holders, and related rights holders in true copy of the deed of establishment of the legal In the Indonesian Civil Code who are entity that has been certified by competent recognized as legal subjects .
ervants/supporters of rights and obligation.
are humans and legal Article 69 of Indonesian Copyright Law entities (Yunus.
Zein, & Siagian 2.
The regulates that if the Minister issues a certificate of acknowledgement of legal persons in Copyright Work and records it in the general Register of Law states in the definition of AuAuthorAy.
AuCopyright Works, the certificate will specify the name of the HolderAy, author and the copyright holder, or the name of PhonogramAy.
Article 1.
2 Copyright Law defines an the owner of the related right products.
Article 74 Author as a person or several persons who .
of Indonesian Copyright Law individually or jointly produce works that are regulates the revocation of the recordation of unique and personal.
Article 1.
4 Copyright Law Works and Related Rights products based on the defines Copyright Holder as an Author as the application of the person or legal entity whose Copyright owner, the party acquiring a lawful right name is recorded as the author, copyright holder, from the Author or other parties who acquire or related rights owner.
subsequent rights from the party such acquiring AuPerformer.
Ay AuProducer The aforementioned provisions pictured the lawful rights.
Article 1.
6 Copyright Law defines strict limitation of Indonesian Copyright Law legal Performer.
as one or several persons who subject to a legal person.
This legal person- individually or jointly display and perform works.
centric also describes the provisions concerning Article 1.
7 defines the Producer of Phonogram as copyright protection measures through lawsuits.
a person or legal entity that is the first to record Article 97 juncto Article 99 Indonesian Copyright and is responsible for performing voice recording Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro or sound recording, both performance recording defined as the person who creates the work, and voice or other sound recording.
therefore AI cannot be an author because the Based on the statutory review concerning Indonesian Copyright "human the qualification of Copyright subject according to authorship requirement".
Moreover.
AI cannot be Copyright Law that acknowledges human and considered an "author" due to the inexistence of legal entity as the subject, itAs relevant to also legal standing.
As a legal subject, especially in elaborate on legal entity as an artificial legal the context of copyright.
AI is deemed not to have The qualification of the legal subject in creativity and personality as humans do, so in the Copyright Law is by general.
Indonesian law also copyright framework, when AI makes a work it is recognises 2 .
types of legal person, not considered a result of creativity and cannot be consisting of natural person .
uman/individua.
protected by copyright because it was not and legal person / juristic person .
egal made/produced by legal subject.
In this manner, entity/corporatio.
A natural person is any human AI with regards to copyright is seen as a being, with legal capacity commencing from the specialized device that helps people during the time of birth.
A legal person is an association of time spent making works.
If a copyrighted work is people or special-purpose fund that is recognized created by a human using AI as a technical tool, by law as having a legal personality and capable the result can be protected as copyright (Ramli et of being the subject of rights and duties.
A Legal al, 2.
The authors argue that when AI is person is known as an artificial person, meaning perceived merely as the tools/device that support that its existence is created by a natural legal people in creating the works, there will be no legal person .
group of person.
whose status is issue, however with the advancement of AI granted or acknowledged by the law.
massively rising itAs arguable whether AI can be The aforementioned provisions show that seen merely as the tools or should be seen as the authorship, ownership, rights, and obligations advance tools.
This will bring the impact concerning copyrights in Indonesia Copyright Law concerning the degree of creativity and human are entitled to legal persons.
In other words, contribution in creating the work and whether the Indonesia Copyright Law is human-centric .
egal work is eligible for copyright protection, especially person-centri.
There is no justification and legal when there is only an insignificant contribution of formulation based on Indonesian Copyright Law humans and the domination of AI in the work that can be the basis for granting legal rights creation process.
Further, itAs important to analyze including economic rights and moral rights to non- not only the aspect of rights but also the aspect of legal persons and further, only legal persons have accountability and legal responsibility of the legal standing in the court.
Further, since in the The discussion of legal rights and Indonesian Copyright Law the term "Author" is responsibility is strongly related to the discussion Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro of legal personality since the legal person is the degree of creativity, which can only conducted by bearer of legal rights and duties, therefore the a human according to copyright perspective.
next sub-section will discuss and analyze the however, there is uncertainty regarding what potential of acknowledgement of the limited legal qualities of originality and creativity a person personality of Artificial Intelligence.
should have to be recognized as an author Under The Acknowledgement of Limited Artificial Indonesian Law, the AuoriginalityAy aspect is not Legal Personality for Artificial Intelligence:
explicitly stated, but rather implied in the definition A Potential Solution? of AauthorA in the article 1.
2 stating that a creator is Human authorship is undoubtedly a legal a person whose works are AuniqueA and ApersonalA construct designed around policy considerations.
(Noor, 2.
The present framework of copyright law appears About the personality.
Hegel regarded to revolve around "human creativity" In the property as an essential attribute of personality general regime of copyright.
AI cannot be (Yoo, 2.
Further.
Justice Holme argues that considered an author since it will not be able to personality here is a synonym of individuality and discharge legal responsibilities.
However.
AI refers to the unique way in which an individual utilization in the production of creative work sees and expresses himself accordingly.
What disrupts several copyright laws at their core confers copyright protection is not the quality of concerning the human author/creator.
The issues the work, but the fact of being AupersonalAy to the regarding the degree of originality and personality author, meaning that it results from the authorAs of work are influenced by how dominant the From the personality point of view, utilization of AI is in producing the works.
The the copyright aims to protect the reflection of the level of disruption is not just the technology by personality of a person in his / her work.
The itself, but how it is constructed by law (Kaminski, personality of work cannot be attached to AI since AI cannot be said to have a personality like the According to Article 2 of Indonesia personality of a human.
Thus the information Copyright Law, this law (Copyright La.
applies to concerning the human contribution to AI- all Works and Related Rights products of generated work is ultimately important in Indonesian examining the degree of personality through the residents and legal entities.
Based on said degree of creative input and contribution of provision, the author argues that authorship humans in the creation of work.
Indonesia based on Indonesian Copyright Law is human- Copyright law is partly silent regarding whether a centric, therefore works that are not strictly made non-person can qualify for authorship and leaves by humans are ineligible for copyright protection the issue open to judicial interpretation.
ThereAs a due to the lack of originality, personality, and logical relationship between personality and non-Indonesian Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro monism model.
In monism, the personality rights on the other hand, copyright law focuses more on and property rights of a work are considered as a the development of AI in the creative process.
In the Aumonism of copyrightAy relevant then AI or emerging authors could more easily be incorporated into those systems of legal meaning.
personality rights are mixed as single rights and As AI systems become more complex and there is no need to make any distinction (Zhu, assume a bigger part in society, contentions that they ought to have some type of lawful character The authors believe that even though AI gain trustworthiness.
Typically, the arguments are has entered into a sophisticated category, basically AI is still a human-made system that comparisons to legal entities like corporations does not have natural thinking power like humans (Chesterman, 2.
in the sense of carrying out a function or However, since AI is not sentient and is not producing output.
AI depends on a set of conscious of how its output is used and utilized algorithms and input from programmers, where once it is generated, it would not make sense to from these algorithms and inputs.
AI will carry out recognize moral rights in the AI as the AI cannot the functions ordered by it, for example, exercise the implementation of moral rights in the screening, data processing and producing certain form of right to integrity and the right to paternity.
outputs through modifications, so that works The Indonesian government can open up the created by AI are seen as not pure and new possibility of admitting the contribution of AI in creative processes, but abstractions or derivatives creating the Work considering that the use of AI and the output produced by AI has implications Undoubtedly, a person's involvement is required for society, to provide exclusive rights and in starting or operating the AI's creative protection of copyright along with protection of undertaking, however, the process to determine moral rights and economic rights to a person / the authorship or ownership when the AI is several people as parties who produce AI or their utilized and plays a pivotal role in the creation of contribution is needed in carrying out AI functions the work continues to remain in grey area is more possible to be implemented rather than (Christiani.
Qureshi, & Kosasih 2.
making AI and the products it produces become Guadamuz.
The rapid development of AI sooner or later public domains that are not bound to subjects that must be balanced with an accommodative legal can be subject to legal obligations to safeguards Since Indonesian copyright law the use of AI so that it does not conflict with law, constructed authorship as requiring a spark of order, and decency.
It is safer not to allow AI to human brilliance, there would be limited space in acquire copyright ownership which concerns protecting AI as an author and/or legal subject.
If, moral rights and economic rights independently.
Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro As a property right, copyright needs to be Made for Hire" which essentially states that the the object/property attached to a subject that has employer .
ompany, contractor, or programme.
legal standing in the sense of being able to own is considered the creator of a work made under property, to be able to exercise and control the his orders, control or direction (Tektona.
Sari, & rights, and to be held accountable legally.
Alfaris, 2.
Concerning computer-generated anticipate the development of AI, an approach work, there are some arguments on joint can also be taken in the form of expanding the authorship in copyright applications (Lee, 2.
scope of creation which includes Aucomputer- The basis for considering the application of generated works and even AI-generated works this doctrine is that the creations produced along where human intervention is at a minimal level to with the rights that arise - both moral and no intervention at all.
However, when it comes to economic Ae can only be connected to a subject AI-generated works, the authorship of AI will be who can be the bearer/recipient of rights or contentious under Indonesian Copyright laws.
incentives while at the same time being able to However, the limited legal personality of AI could carry out legal obligations as well as legal potentially artifice to avoid problems concerning responsibility/liability (Otero, & Quintais, 2.
legal standing, enabling legal persons .
uman anticipate the possibility of an AI system getting individuals or companie.
to act on behalf of non- out of control, it's important for the government as human persons to exercise their rights and the regulator to formulate the legal basis between obligations (Chesterman, 2.
AI and legal subjects.
Joint ownership between AI and parties This formulation not only has the potential who are AI programmers can be an option to encourage the utilization of AI but also provides regarding the authorization and ownership of legal certainty and potentially solves the problem works produced by AI.
This approach has been concerning the lack of legal accountability for AI- adopted by the UK.
Based on Article 9 .
UK generated works.
This formulation recognizes the Copyright, limited personhood of AI and entangles this computer-generated works where it is stated that limited personhood to a .
person behind the the creator is the person who made the necessary AI to exercise both moral and economic rights.
arrangements for the creation of the work.
However.
AuComputer-generatedAy work, means that the work formulation regarding the scope of "necessary is generated by computer in circumstances such arrangements for the creation of works" for that there is no human author of the work.
This example concerning data feeding as input and provision does not provide copyright for AI operational control of an AI function/program independently but still recognizes the use of AI in (Kop, 2.
to produce copyright-able creative creating works based on the doctrine of "Work Thus, the formulation of special provisions Designs, and Patents Act provision requires a clear Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro for the copyright registration of AI-generative 10 .
minutes of process.
The process of works is needed.
The copyright registration of AI- copyright registration is relatively simple, the generative works requires technical support in the procedure consists of the application form filling inspection process and substantive examinations out the registration form, and uploading the to check the eligibility of granting copyright required documents.
protection based on the degree of creativity.
The online registration form consists of the personality, and originality of the works.
data filling consist of: First, the type of Responding to the phenomena concerning the rapid rise in ability, application, whether the applicant is a Small, utilization, and Medium Enterprises.
Institution.
Development performance of generative AI in art, literature, and Government music creations, it's of paramount importance for Institute, or General Public Applicants.
Second, the Indonesian Copyright Office to formulate the filling concerning the type of work and sub- policy guidelines on copyright protection and type of work, the title of the work and sub- registration of works created using generative AI.
The guidance shall be able to conduct how to announcement and country and the city where it address and measure the degree of human was first announced.
Third, the filling of the creativity used in the creation of works.
Technical information whether the application is submitted guidelines are also needed concerning the directly or submitted through a power of attorney.
examination of good faith in terms of transparency Fourth, the filling concerning the data of the of the author/copyright holder in disclosing the author .
and copyright holder consists of information on the utilization and involvement of name, nationality, address, province, city, district.
AI in creating/generating creative work.
The zip code, email, telephone number, and whether disclosure of AI involvement in creating the work the author .
or copyright holder is a legal submitted for registration must provide a brief The input registration is accompanied by explanation of the human's author creativity as the uploading of required documents consisting of the contributions to the work.
a scan of the Indonesian Citizen ID Card .
or the The technical infrastructures also need individual applican.
or Company Deed .
or the legal entity applican.
Tax ID Number, an advancements to implement this provision.
example of the copyright that will be registered.
Currently.
The Ministry of Law and Human Rights statement of ownership, application form and of the Republic of Indonesia implements the proof of official payment.
After the payment is AAutomatic Approval made, a registration letter will be issued within SystemA as the facilitation for the public to submit approximately 10 .
minutes which can be the registration for the works with approximately downloaded by the registrant.
Copyright Research Academic Registration Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 work is ineligible for copyright protection.
On the infrastructure, the electronic copyright registration other hand, in case there is creative input by menu to accommodate AI-generated work in the humans in programming the AI without which AI Indonesian would not be able to create work, then it can be adjustment and advancement, for example, argued that the degree of creativity exists applicants are instructed to select whether the because AI functioned as the tools utilized by works submitted contain the utilization or the humans in the creation of work.
The technical involvement of AI.
In case there is the examination is further needed to examine the involvement of AI, the work must be submitted degree of human creativity of the work as the with limitation of claim, where the applicant should basis for granting copyright protection.
Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro select the type of elements of work that were AIgenerated with the description of AIAegenerated CONCLUSION materials and identification of human contribution The IndonesiaAs in modification, supplementation, and compilation copyright law is based on the principle of human of the materials and how the human has control Due to their lack of originality and over AI technology used to generate copyrighted creativity, works not strictly created by humans are ineligible for copyright protection.
However.
From the aforementioned description, the the rapid development of AI sooner or later must examiner of copyright registration objectively be balanced with an accommodative legal assessed the degree of creativity of such work.
Considering that the creations in the has been argued that creativity in a work can be copyright framework consist of both moral and assessed in 2 ways: based on the final economic rights that can only be legally output/product or based on the process of connected to a subject who can be the bearer or creation by examining the human contribution in recipient of rights while also being able to carry both aspects or whether the applicant fulfils the out legal responsibility and accountability serves criteria as the person by whom the arrangements as the basis for considering the application of this necessary for the creation of the work are undertaken or in the case that the work which is The Indonesian government can open up computer Ae generated, the person who causes the possibility of accepting AI's role in the creation the work to be created.
If the AI works of the work and formulate the limited artificial legal autonomously with an insignificant amount of personhood of AI by granting exclusive rights, human contribution, or even without any human copyright protection, moral rights, and economic creative input, then the degree of minimum rights to individuals or groups of individuals who creativity is not fulfilled, as a consequence the produce AI or whose contribution is required for Law Reform, 20.
, 2024, 54-75 Master of Law.
Faculty of Law.
Universitas Diponegoro AI function.
This formulation not only potential to encourage the utilization of AI but also provides Chesterman.
Artificial intelligence and legal certainty and potentially solves the problem the limits of legal personality.
International concerning the lack of legal accountability for AI- and Comparative Law Quarterly.
Vol.
generated works.
In addition, the advancement of (No.
,pp.
819Ae844.
technical and legal support is needed in https://doi.
org/10.
1017/S0020589
implementing this provisioning model.
Christiani.
Theresia Anita.
Qureshi.
Muhammad
REFERENCES