Can an artificial intelligence chatbot be the author of a scholarly article?
2
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
At the end of 2022, the appearance of ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot with amazing writing ability, caused a great sensation in academia. The chatbot turned out to be very capable, but also capable of deception, and the news broke that several researchers had listed the chatbot (including its earlier version) as co-authors of their academic papers. In response, Nature and Science expressed their position that this chatbot cannot be listed as an author in the papers they publish. Since an AI chatbot is not a human being, in the current legal system, the text automatically generated by an AI chatbot cannot be a copyrighted work; thus, an AI chatbot cannot be an author of a copyrighted work. Current AI chatbots such as ChatGPT are much more advanced than search engines in that they produce original text, but they still remain at the level of a search engine in that they cannot take responsibility for their writing. For this reason, they also cannot be authors from the perspective of research ethics.
Abstract
At the end of 2022, the appearance of ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot with amazing writing ability, caused a great sensation in academia. The chatbot turned out to be very capable, but also capable of deception, and the news broke that several researchers had listed the chatbot (including its earlier version) as co-authors of their academic papers. In response, Nature and Science expressed their position that this chatbot cannot be listed as an author in the papers they publish. Since an AI chatbot is not a human being, in the current legal system, the text automatically generated by an AI chatbot cannot be a copyrighted work; thus, an AI chatbot cannot be an author of a copyrighted work. Current AI chatbots such as ChatGPT are much more advanced than search engines in that they produce original text, but they still remain at the level of a search engine in that they cannot take responsibility for their writing. For this reason, they also cannot be authors from the perspective of research ethics.
참고문헌 (30)
- "optimizing language models for dialogue" (2023)[URL]
- "Teachers fear ChatGPT will make cheating easier than ever" (2022)[URL]
- Stokel-Walker C, "ChatGPT listed as author on research papers : many scientists disapprove", Nature, 613, pp.620~621 (2023)[DOI]
- "The AI writing on the wall", Nat Mach Intell, 5, pp.1~ (2023)[DOI]
- "Authorship" (2023)[URL]
- "Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use", Nature, 613, pp.612~ (2023)[DOI]
- Thorp HH, "ChatGPT is fun, but not an author", Science, 379, pp.313~ (2023)[DOI]
- "Internet Speculative Fiction Database" (2023)[URL]
- "The first book written by a computer program" (2023)[URL]
- "Can a computer be an author: copyright aspects of artificial intelligence. Hastings Commun Entertain Law J" (1982)[URL]
- "Copyright Act, Law No. 18547" (2021)[URL]
- "Re: second request for reconsideration for refusal to register a recent entrance to paradise (correspondence ID 1-3ZPC6C3; SR # 1-7100387071)" (2022)[URL]
- Hugenholtz PB, "Copyright and artificial creation: does EU copyright law protect AI-assisted output?", Int Rev Intellect Prop Compet Law, 52, pp.1190~1216 (2021)[DOI]
- "Whose work? Copyright in AI generated artwork?" (2022)[URL]
- "Beijing Film Law Firm v Beijing Baidu Netcom Science & Technology. Beijing Internet Court Civil Judgment (2018) Jing 0491 Min Chu No 239" (2019)[URL]
- "Naruto v Slater, 888 F.3d 418" (2018)[URL]
- Ren X., "“Tencent Dreamwriter”: decision of the People’s Court of Nanshan (District of Shenzhen) 24 December 2019: Case No. (2019) Yue 0305 Min Chu No. 14010", Int Rev Intellect Prop Compet Law, 51, pp.652~659 (2020)[DOI]
- "Exclusive: India recongnises AI as co-author of copyrighted artwork" (2021)[URL]
- "Is it a Picasso? A Rembrandt? No, it’s artificial intelligence" (2021)[URL]
- "Sahni A. Suryast (registration number 1188619)" (2021)[URL]
- "Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (as amended on September 28, 1979)" (1979)[URL]
- "Thaler v Vidal, 43 F.4th 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2022)" (2022)[URL]
- "FCAFC 62" (2022)[URL]
- "China Law Translate. Copyright Law of the PRC (2021 version)" (2020)[URL]
- "Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute. 17 U.S. Code § 101: definitions"[URL]
- "Writers Write. Pen names" (2021)[URL]
- Park SH, "Copyright law" (2017), Parkyoungsa
- "Additionally, the authors were unable to identify” co-author: another retraction for Lemus" (2012)[URL]
- "Lithium-ion batteries: a machine-generated summary of current research" (2019)[URL]
- "ChatGPT explains why AIs like ChatGPT should be regulated: we asked the text-generating AI ChatGPT to talk about its own flaws" (2022)[URL]