top of page
Search

Strategic Alliance for IPR: GPAI Summit Shapes the Future of AI

Abstract:

India recently led the global partnership on the Artificial Intelligence Summit at the chair in December 2023, which marked a milestone in the worldwide disclosure of AI development. The current submission includes a showcase of India’s commitment towards AI and speaks about the need for revolving in reformative IPR laws worldwide. The summit unfolded nuanced perspectives on the intricacies of the web relationship between artificial intelligence and IPR. The summit acted as a forum to properly explore the dynamics of the evolving notions in the landscape of technology, several eminent lawyers and justices like Pratibha Singh and lawyers. Pravin Anand highlighted the need for legal adaptability in facing AI dynamics and urgency in the paradigm shift in patent norms. The summit also raised a spark about the needed agency to develop an international collaboration to deal with this loophole in the legal framework.

 

Introduction

The recent summit of GPAI, also known as the global partnership on artificial intelligence, was held in New Delhi. The summit witnessed the participation of 28 countries, with the European Union adopting the 'New Delhi Declaration' of the GPAI. This article explores the key highlights of the GPAI Summit, the significance of the Delhi Declaration, and the strategic initiatives introduced by India to propel the responsible development of AI, with a specific focus on the importance of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). It brought forth several critical discussions on the intersection of the web of artificial intelligence, AI, intellectual property rights, or IPR. Eminent speakers at the summit raised several thought-provoking questions and dilemmas about the space and the realm of AI development, which has Potentially raised the existing patent laws, and this submission also sparked a discussion on the need for a better legal framework to deal with the development.


Importance of IPR in AI

The evolving landscape of AI technology has brought the focus towards the role of intellectual property rights to ensure the continuity of encouragement to innovate and support interest as well as promote fair competition. It further encourages investment in research and the development of AI. IPR incorporates patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets, providing legal frameworks to safeguard the creations and inventions of individuals and organisations. Patents in AI allow inventors to protect novel algorithms, processes, or applications, ensuring that the fruits of their labour remain exclusive for a defined period. Copyrights can protect the expression of creative AI works, such as artistic creations or literary outputs. Trademarks become essential in branding AI products and services, distinguishing them in the market. Additionally, trade secrets guard proprietary algorithms, methods, or datasets that give a competitive edge. Moreover, the ethical use of AI raises questions about data ownership, privacy, and responsible AI practices. Striking a balance between fostering innovation and safeguarding individual rights becomes paramount in developing and deploying AI technologies. The symbiosis of AI and IPR necessitates a recalibration of existing legal frameworks to accommodate the dynamic nature of AI innovation. Striving for a harmonious integration of intellectual property protection and responsible AI practices is essential to foster innovation while ensuring ethical considerations in the ever-evolving world of artificial intelligence.

Image Source: http://surl.li/qdrpl


AI and Patent Law: Need for Reformative Adoption

Honourable Justice Pratibha Singh emphasised the agency and the immediate need to align the framework of patent law with the advancements and reformations in AI technology. She also gained knowledge of the unprecedented changes that took place in a short period and highlighted the dynamic nature of AI with the emergence of the volume nature of AI technology, which challenges the traditional norms and timelines associated with the protection of patents. New laws must be implemented since these obsolete frameworks do not do justice anymore.


Reputed advocate Praveen Anand added to the depth of these concerns, which shed light on the challenges of meeting the essential requirements for patenting in the context of the year. Due to AI's dynamic nature, which is undoubtedly present, it poses several difficulties in making clear distinctions and adequate disclosures. The biggest hurdle while posing the patented process is the notion of insufficiency in disclosure.


While addressing these new challenges, Justice Singh pointed out that section 3,000 of the Patent Act of 1970 describes the obstructions to patenting AI in India despite such boundaries, which are ambiguous in nature. Companies like Nokia Ericsson Interdigital have obtained successful patents for AI generated in inventions that have demonstrated their active contribution to several technological advancements.


AI-Generated Content and A Need for IPR Protection

A renowned professor from the University of Oxford, Nick Bostrom, focused on the challenges of IPR or intellectual property rights while protecting AI-generated content, especially in the us. Since only human beings are recognised as valid authors, ambiguity regarding copyright protections for individual elements of AI-generated codified systems has been raised. He highlighted the case of Kristina and her AI-generated comic book. He discussed the court ruling that unique images generated using AI algorithms do not, unfortunately, enjoy the protection of copyright laws.


This brought forward the ambiguous nature of the boundaries, John, and the lack of copyright protection for age-generated content extends to several parts of the world, raising concerns about using trade secrets to protect AI algorithms, as mentioned by Justice Singh. Previously, this shift posed challenges to the growth of technology and the emergence of several new forms of algorithms, which potentially risks the original intent of patent protection to encourage disclosure.


Adapting be a loss to AI: a new proposal for change and transformation.

Eminent lawyer Praveen Anand proposed transformative reforms for IPR laws to accommodate the unique characteristics of AI inventions. He suggested considering machines of ordinary scale (MOCA) as a benchmark for judging machine-made inventions. The approach aims to bridge the gap of the current assessment of IPR laws, which relies on the hypothetical person of ordinary skills in art, also known as PSITA. At the same time, it recognises the creative intentions inherent in AI inventions. Anand argues that comparing the innovative mechanisms of types of machinery would offer a more accurate evaluation.

Conclusion

The GPAI Summit, the global partnership on artificial intelligence, became an avid forum to raise critical questions and dilemmas about the evolving landscape of AI art and its interaction with intellectual property rights. It has sparked a cold and raised alarms for a legal rethink, which has become an urgent need in adapting patent laws while addressing the private issues in IPR protection for AI-generated content has its Complexities in intricacies of deep fakes within the realm of IPR, which needed crucial navigation through the critical steps towards fostering a more harmonious relationship and intersection between innovation and legal safeguards. It requires a global collaborative initiation at their GPAI summit that underscores the necessity for international cooperation in creating a legal framework that supports innovation and promotes and ensures ethical and responsible usage of AI technologies.

 

References:

 

*This article is authored by Vijetha Saishree Palle, Student of Symbiosis Law School, Noida and reviewed by Twinkle, Student of Symbiosis Law School, Noida.



Comments

bottom of page