The result was a portrait produced based on the styles and motifs country email list found in Rembrandt's art, but produced by algorithms. This is just one example in a growing number of computer-generated works. A short novel written by a Japanese computer program in reached the second round of a national literary award. Google-owned company Deep Mind has created to recordings. Other projects consisted of the activity of computers to write poems, edit photos and compose a musical. The question that arises is who owns the copyright of a work generated by artificial intelligence? This is not just an academic question. AI is already being used to generate works of music, journalism and games, and these works could theoretically be considered copyright-free because they are not created by a human author. This would mean that they could be freely used and reused by anyone, and would be bad news for the companies that sell them.
Imagine investing millions in a system that generates music for video games, only to find out that the music is not protected by law and can be used for free by anyone in the world. Unlike earlier computer-generated artwork, machine learning software generates truly creative creation without any human intervention. AI is not just a tool. While humans program the algorithms, the decision – the creative spark – comes almost entirely from the machine. However, this does not mean that copyright should be assigned to the computer. Machines do not (yet) have rights and status as persons under the law. But that doesn't necessarily mean there shouldn't be any copyright. Not all copyrights are owned by individuals, after all.