Abstract:
This paper aims to support the New Zealand government in the process of reviewing the Copyright Act 1994, to achieve the best outcomes for the New Zealand economy and copyright law.
This paper examines four distinct policy positions that New Zealand could adopt when addressing AI works through the lens of copyright and how these policy positions could influence the amendment of the Copyright Act 1994. The rapid development and commercialization of artificial intelligence have led to a surge in AI-generated and AI-assisted works that vary in the level of human intervention. The blurred line between human creativity and AI creativity requires the amendment of the Copyright Act 1994 depending on the policy stance the legislature decides to take.
The paper provides legislative suggestions on three levels. Firstly, it argues for the need to define the term "AI" in the Act and to differentiate between "AI-generated" and "computer-generated" works. Secondly, the paper examines the two authorship stances New Zealand may adopt to support these policy positions. Thirdly, it explores how the endorsement of each policy position could affect the requirements of originality and fair dealing in copyright law. The four policy options include the full protection regime, the human expression regime, the licensing regime, and the significant originality regime. Each suggestion considers the legal frameworks of the USA, EU, and the UK. However, the paper does not delve into a normative discussion of AI and the Copyright Act 1994 but rather approaches the topic from a pragmatic standpoint.
