Chat products GPT created are relatively complete products, widely used in many parts of the world as well as Vietnam. These Chat GPT products are very diverse, can be poems, essays, scripts, computer programs, etc.
However, with such a complete result, many Chat GPT users in Vietnam have wondered about the ownership, the copyright to the Chat GPT products. Would the products created by Chap GPT belong to the user that make the request, order on Chat GPT platform or the company behind Chat GPT, or whether the copyright belong to the AI of Chat GPT itself?
Who owns the Chat GPT product created?
A Chat GPT product created through aggregating data from many sources in cyberspace is currently being applied a lot in life.
Without considering that the product itself has the potential to infringe the copyrights of other third parties, but only consider the matter of copyright of the products, belonging to the user who enters commands into Chat GPT, AI of Chat GPT or the company that stands for it then we will have 2 cases.
The copyright owner is a Chat GPT user
Clause 1, Article 12a of the Amendment on the Intellectual Property Law 2022 No. 07/2022/QH15 (“Intellectual Property Law 2022”) of Vietnam stipulates: “The author is the person who directly creates the work. If two or more people directly co-create the work with the intention that their contributions are combined into a complete whole, those persons are co-authors.”
In addition, Clause 1, Article 13 of the Intellectual Property Law 2022 also stipulates: “Organizations and individuals whose works are protected by copyright include the direct creator and the copyright owner prescribed in Articles 37 to 42 of this Law.”
Both of the above provisions have regulations on whether the author or organization or individual entitled to copyright protection is a ‘direct creator’ or includes provisions similar to direct creator.
Current Vietnamese law does not recognize the existence of AI as a valid natural or legal entity. Particularly in the Intellectual Property Law, the subject of protection of intellectual economic rights can only be a ‘person’ with civil capacity and the ability to take legal responsibility.
Thereby, currently, the comments that Chat GPT’s AI should be recognized as the author of Chat GPT products or as co-authors, etc., are invalid under current law because AI is not human, although it is AI Chat GPT that has the function of synthesizing and composing, creating a complete Chat GPT product.
On the contrary, from another perspective, although the user does not perform the above complicated steps, it is the user who enters the search command and places requests for Chat GPT to create Chat GPT products. Accordingly, the user is the employer and Chat GPT is the employee. In this view, Chat GPT is just a tool to aggregate and provide information to Chat GPT users, and users are the will to decide to create Chat GPT products.
AI in Chat GPT will not have the function to create a work on its own if there is no user impact which is a necessary condition to create a work.
In terms of civil transactions, when users agree to the terms of the company behind Chat GPT to use Chat GPT’s services, creating Chat GPT products, essentially between the two parties has formed a civil transactions.
Whether it’s free or paid, the transaction is verified. The user is the user of the service, and the Chat GPT and the company behind is the party providing the service or providing Chat GPT products expressed in text form.
Clause 2, Article 39 of the Intellectual Property Law 2022 stipulates: “Organizations and individuals that enter into contracts with creators of works are the owners of the rights specified in Articles 20 and Point 3, Article 19 of this Law, unless otherwise agreed.”
Accordingly, unless otherwise agreed, a civil transaction between a user and Chat GPT is recognized as a legal written civil transaction through electronic means in the form of a data message (Clause 1 of Article 119 Civil Code 2015 No. 91/2015/QH13), the user will have the right to “Publish the work or allow others to publish the work” (Clause 3, Article 19) and all economic rights specified in Article 20 Intellectual Property Law 2022.
Thereby, the user has become the copyright owner of the Chat GPT product according to the provisions of Article 36 of the Intellectual Property Law 2022.
The copyright owner is Chat GPT or the company behind Chat GPT
As analyzed above, it is impossible for Chat GPT to become the copyright owner of the Chat GPT product according to the current Vietnam law’s definition of the author and the copyright owner.
However, in the world, there have been many cases of countries accepting AI as the inventor, typically in the case of AI DABUS as the inventor within the Dr. Thaler’s legal fights with many international courts. Accordingly, although the current regulations do not recognize it, in the future, Vietnam can amend the laws to be more open, recognizing AI as the inventor, author, and even copyright owner.
In which, the recognition of AI as the right holder, author will be relatively more difficult than recognizing AI as an inventor or author.
For starters, Vietnam could consider changing the term ‘direct creator’ to ‘subject directly creates the products’, which includes the possibility of AI being an inventor, author, etc.
The change of regulations in the more flexible method is reasonable considering the development of science and technology and the emergence of artificial super-intelligence such as Chat GPT with the creation of Chat GPT products that needs not too much cost or no effort needed at all.
If Chat GPT creates a work that is a graduation thesis, a doctoral project that requires a lot of effort before for users, but now it might only take a split-second without the user needing to learn or accumulate information. It will not be fair to award degrees, PhDs to Chat GPT users just because they have access to this cutting-edge technology.
Failure to control and recognize the two sides as the same can create serious consequences for society, causing individuals without practical knowledge and experience to take up important positions thanks to ‘fake degrees’.
Therefore, at present, the governments of many countries have banned the use of Chat GPT in graduation theses. If the students, college students, graduates continue to use Chat GPT in areas that have been strictly prohibited, when detected, they will be severely punished. In the near future, in the writer’s opinions, national governments and world organizations like WIPO will have major updates to the intellectual property law system as well as related laws to limit the abuse of Chat GPT and Chat GPT products.
Notes when using Chat GPT products
In addition to the issue of whose copyright over Chat GPT products belongs, Chat GPT users should be more concerned about whether the Chat GPT products created infringes the intellectual property rights of other parties because currently, the company behind Chat GPT has yet to provide verified, authentic information on how Chat GPT aggregates and generates information.
It is possible that the Chat GPT products created in one language is actually a translation product from another language.
In addition, if multiple parties apply for copyright protection for Chat GPT products, it is easy to lead to cross-registering and subsequent copyright lawsuits. Consequently, at the moment, when all information is still unclear and no one is sure of the rights related to the Chat GPT product created, it is best for users to consider using the Chat GPT products for academic and work purposes in a limited way.
You can see a list of Vietnam IP Firms here.