Are works created using artificial intelligence protected by copyright?

Entrance

AI-powered content creation has revolutionized the field in recent years, particularly in visual arts, software development, literary texts, and music. However, this development has raised a fundamental question in intellectual property law: Can a work created by AI be protected by copyright? Furthermore, who is the "author" in such works? Is it the AI ​​itself, its developer, or its user?

This article examines whether content generated by artificial intelligence is subject to copyright protection under the Turkish Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works (FSEK) and international law; it also discusses relevant case law, doctrinal debates, and proposed legal policies.

1. Can Artificial Intelligence Create Works of Art?

AI systems today:

• Image (e.g., MidJourney, DALL·E),
• Metin (ChatGPT, Claude),
• Music (AIVA, Amper Music),
• code (Copilot, AlphaCode).

Although this content appears original, whether AI can engage in creative activity without human intervention is crucial. This is because copyright protection is based on the principle of "human creation.

2. Who is the Copyright Owner in Turkish Law?

Article 1/B of the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works No. 5846:

"A work is any intellectual or artistic product that bears the distinctive character of its creator and takes the form of a work of science, literature, music, fine arts, or cinema."

This leads to the following conclusion:

• Copyright is granted only created by humans .
• AI lacks personality it cannot be the sole creator of a work of art.

3. Who is the Author in AI-Assisted Productions?

The prominent possibilities in jurisprudence and doctrine:

a) AI Developer

• The person or team that codes the AI ​​system.
• However, ownership is generally not recognized because the developer did not directly produce the work.

b) AI User (Prompter)

• The person who manages the system and gives commands.
• If their contribution is creative and guiding, they can be considered the author of the work.

c) Nobody

• some legal systems (for example, in England) sui generis (special protection) , in other systems copyright does not arise at all.

4. The Situation in International Law

a) U.S. Copyright Office (USCO)

• The 2022 decision ruled that images generated by AI are not protected.
• Content that does not involve human intervention is not protected by copyright.

b) EU Copyright Directive

• The condition of "human creation" is required.
• In AI-generated works, the extent of human intervention is valuable.

c) WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization)

• There is no clear international regulation yet.
• As of 2024, a global consultation process is underway under the title "AI and Intellectual Property".

5. Problems Encountered in Practice Regarding the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works

• graphic designersupload AI-generated visuals to stock photo sites, do they own the copyright?
• screenplays written with AIbe considered works of art?
• software coded by AIprotected as a "modified work" by the author?

These questions have not yet been definitively answered by Supreme Court precedents. However, the prevailing view in legal doctrine content that does not contain elements of human creation is not eligible for copyright protection .

6. Contractual Dispute Resolution Methods

Contracts play a critical role in areas where legislation is unclear:

• Users must acquire usage rights for AI-powered works through contracts.
• Ownership declarations must be obtained for works produced with AI .
• Platform terms of use (e.g., OpenAI, Adobe Firefly) should be carefully reviewed.

7. Debates in Doctrine

Some legal experts view AI-powered works as follows:

• Providing protection similar to copyright but with narrower limits (for example, sui generis rights),
• Providing limited-time protection to AI users,
• AI developers should own the "infrastructure rights" to the work

It suggests this. However, this requires extensive legislative changes.

8. Conclusion and Evaluation

Whether AI-generated content can be protected by copyright is a critical question that interests not only lawyers but also programmers, artists, designers, and investors. Under the current Turkish legal system, AI content without human intervention is not protected by copyright. However, limited protection is possible in cases where human influence is clearly proven. It seems inevitable that special regulations and new protection models will be developed for this field in the future.

Trainee Instructor Esmanur AKTAŞ