题名

論機器學習之著作權困境與應對

并列篇名

A Research on the Copyright Difficulties and Response of Machine Learning

DOI

10.6199/NTULJ.202306_52(2).0003

作者

徐龍(Long Xu)；鄭冠宇(Gung-Yeu Jeng)

关键词

人工智慧 ； 機器學習 ； 機器閱讀 ； 著作權限縮 ； 轉化性使用 ； 合理使用 ； 強制授權 ； 法定授權 ； Artificial Intelligence ； Machine Learning ； Machine Reading ； The Restriction of Copyright ； Fair Use ； Transformative Use ； Compulsory License ； Statute License

期刊名称

臺大法學論叢

卷期/出版年月

52卷2期（2023 / 06 / 01）

页次

391 - 475

内容语文

繁體中文;英文
中文摘要

人工智慧技術之關鍵，係以資料訓練演算法為特徵的機器學習，需要蒐集、處理並輸入巨量資料供演算法訓練，因而一開始即可能涉及大量重製、改作或編輯他人之著作。人工智慧對著作資料之利用行為，並不必然可以援引現行著作權法之限制規定而免責，使得企業為開展人工智慧研發與應用，需要對大量著作申請授權並支付費用，這不僅造成實踐之困難，亦嚴重阻礙人工智慧領域之科技發展。反觀美國、日本與歐盟等國家或地區已經提供合法化解決方案之背景下，為消除人工智慧發展之著作權障礙並提供國際競爭優勢，有必要制定合法化利用之特別規定。相比於透過著作權限縮、合理使用或強制授權制度，法定授權更有利於降低交易成本，衡平各方之利益，保障著作權人利益的同時，為人工智慧科技之應用與發展提供良好法制環境。故而，本文認為應就機器學習制定法定授權制度，並客觀界定具體適用情形，完善相應配套措施。
英文摘要

The development and application of artificial intelligence is a hot task in the high speed of the era of science and technology. Machine learning is the key to artificial intelligence, which is characterized by data training algorithms. It requires to collect, process and input large amounts of data for algorithm training. Therefore, extensive copying, reworking or editing of other people's work may inevitably be involved in the very beginning. However, the use of works by artificial intelligence would not necessarily exempt the limitation of the current copyright law, which makes enterprises need to apply for authorization and pay fees for a large number of works. It not only causes practical difficulties, but also seriously hinders the development of science and technology in the field of artificial intelligence. According to the present situation that the United States, Japan, the European Union and other countries or regions in the world have already provided legalized solutions for the problems above, it is necessary for Taiwan to formulate the special rules for the utilization of legalization in order to eliminate the copyright obstacles to the development of artificial intelligence and provide international competitive advantages. Consequently, this paper analyzed the business model as well as proposing four kinds of coping styles such as the restriction of the copyright, the fair use, compulsory license system, and statute license system. In result, compared with the restriction of the copyright, fair use or compulsory license system, the statute license system is more conducive to reducing transaction costs, balancing the interests of all parties, protecting the interests of copyright owners, and providing a good environment for the application and development of artificial intelligence technology. Therefore, this paper argues that the statute license system should be applied to machine learning, and the specific applicable situation should be scientifically defined to improve the corresponding supporting measures.
主题分类 社會科學 > 法律學
参考文献
  1. 沈宗倫(2008)。論數位暫時性重製於著作權法制法律評價：兼以重製權的新詮釋評價我國相關立法。東吳法律學報，19(4)，31-74。
    連結：
  2. 徐龍(2021)。論人工智慧創作之法律屬性與保護。東吳法律學報，33(1)，139-181。
    連結：
  3. Association of Research Libraries (2012). Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries. Association of Research Libraries. https://www.arl.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/code-of-best-practices-fair-use.pdf
  4. Beebe, B.(2020).An Empirical Study of U.S. Copyright Fair Use Opinions Updated, 1978-2019.New York University Journal of Intellectual Property & Entertainment Law,10(1),1-39.
  5. Bently, L.(Ed.),Kretschmer, M.(Ed.)(2008).Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900).University of Cambridge.
  6. Bodenheimer, E.(1974).Jurisprudence: The Philosophy and Method of the Law.Harvard University Press.
  7. Borghi, M.,Karapapa, S.(2011).Non-Display Uses of Copyright Works: Google Books and Beyond.Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property,1(1),21-52.
  8. Calabresi, G.,Melamed, A. D.(1972).Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral.Harvard Law Review,85(6),1089-1128.
  9. Coase, R. H.(1960).The Problem of Social Cost.The Journal of Law and Economics,3,1-44.
  10. Cooter, R.,Ulen, T.(2016).Law and Economic.Pearson Education.
  11. Dornis, T. W.(2020).Artificial Creativity: Emergent Works and the Void In Current Copyright Doctrine.Yale Journal of Law and Technology,22(1),1-60.
  12. Drassinower, A.(2015).What’s Wrong with Copying?.Harvard University Press.
  13. European Commission (2016). Impact Assessment on the modernisation of EU copyright rules. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/impact-assessment-modernisation-eu-copyright-rules
  14. European Commission (2016). Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on copyright in the Digital Single Market. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52016PC0593
  15. Ficsor, M.(2004).Guide to the Copyright and Related Rights Treaties: Administered by WIPO and Glossary of Copyright and Related Rights Terms.World Intellectual Property Organization=WIPO.
  16. Fisher, W. W.(1988).Reconstructing Fair Use Doctrine.Harvard Law Review,101(8),1659-1795.
  17. Fisher, W. W.(2001).Theories of Intellectual Property.New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property
  18. Fu, B.,Kirchbuchner, F.,Damer, N.(2021).The Effect of Wearing a Face Mask on Face Image Quality.2021 16th IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition (FG 2021)
  19. Gordon, W. J.(1982).Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the Betamax Case and Its Predecessors.Columbia Law Review,82(8),1600-1657.
  20. Grimmelmann, J.(2016).Copyright for Literate Robots.Iowa Law Review,101(2),657-681.
  21. Guibault, Lucie M. C. R.(2002).Copyright Limitations and Contracts: An Analysis of the Contractual Overridability of Limitations on Copyright.Kluwer Law International.
  22. Hadjeres, G.,Pachet, F.,Nielsen, F.(2017).Deepbach: A Steerable Model for Bach Chorales Generation.Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning,70,1362-1371.
  23. Hargreaves, I.(2011).,未出版
  24. Hicks, O. (2019, March 1). ART-ificial Intelligence: The Curious Case of Edmond De Belamy. ISIS. https://isismagazine.org.uk/2019/03/art-ificial-intelligence-the-curious-case-of-edmond-de-belamy/
  25. Hilty, R.(Ed.),Moscon, V.(Ed.)(2017).Modernisation of the EU Copyright Rules: Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition.Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition.
  26. Intellectual Property Office of Singapore(2021).Understanding the Copyright Act 2021: Updating Copyright for the Digital Age.Intellectual Property Office of Singapore.
  27. Intellectual Property Office of United Kingdom (2012). Modernising Copyright: a Modern, Robust and Flexible Framework. HM Government. https://www.mpaonline.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Modernising_Copyright_-_a_modern_robust_and_flexible_framework_-_Government_response.pdf
  28. Kulesz, O.(2018).Culture, Platforms and Machines: the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on the Diversity of Cultural Expressions.United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
  29. Larenz, Karl,陳愛娥（譯）(2010).法學方法論.五南.
  30. Lee, E.(2010).Technological Fair Use.Southern California Law Review,83(4),797-874.
  31. Leval, P. N.(1990).Toward a Fair Use Standard.Harvard Law Review,103(5),1105-1136.
  32. Levendowski, A.(2018).How Copyright Law Can Fix Artificial Intelligence’s Implicit Bias Problem.Washington Law Review,93(2),579-630.
  33. Lunney, G. S., Jr(1996).Reexamining Copyright's Incentives-Access Paradigm.Vanderbilt Law Review,49(3),483-656.
  34. Maeda, S.(2020).Unpaired Image Super-Resolution Using Pseudo-Supervision.Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
  35. Marsland, S.(2014).Machine Learning: An Algorithmic Perspective.Chapman and Hall/CRC.
  36. Mitchell, T. M.(1997).Machine Learning.McGraw-Hill Education.
  37. Newitz, A (2021, May 30). Movie written by algorithm turns out to be hilarious and intense: From the archives: Ars talks to the filmmakers who collaborated with an AI for Sunspring. Ars Technica Addendum. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/05/an-ai-wrote-this-movie-and-itsstrangely-moving/
  38. Pound, R.(1997).Social Control Through Law.Routledge.
  39. Price, R. (2016, March 24). Microsoft Took Its New A.I. Chatbot Offline After It Started Spewing Racist Tweets. SLATE. https://slate.com/business/2016/03/microsoft-s-new-ai-chatbot-tay-removed-from-twitter-due-to-racist-tweets.html
  40. Ramalho, A.(2016).The Competence of the European Union in Copyright Lawmaking: A Normative Perspective of EU Powers for Copyright Harmonization.Springer.
  41. Rosati, E.(2018).Report to European Parliament: The Exception for Text and Data Mining (TDM) in the Proposed Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market-Technical Aspects.
  42. Sag, M.(2019).The New Legal Landscape for Text Mining and Machine Learning.Journal of the Copyright Society of the U.S.A.,66(2),291-367.
  43. Samuel, A. L.(1959).Some Studies in Machine Learning Using the Game of Checkers.IBM Journal of Research and Development,3(3),211-229.
  44. Samuelson, P.,Hashimoto, K.(2019).Is the U.S. Fair Use Doctrine Compatible with Berne and TRIPS Obligations?.Pluralism or Universalism in International Copyright Law
  45. Schönberger, D.(2018).Deep Copyright: Up - and Downstream Questions Related to Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML).Zeitschrift für geistiges Eigentum (ZGE),10(1),35-58.
  46. Schwab, K.(2016).The Fourth Industrial Revolution.World Economic Forum.
  47. Sobel, B. L.W.(2017).Artificial Intelligence’s Fair Use Crisis.Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts,41(1),45-97.
  48. Yanisky-Ravid, S.(2017).Generating Rembrandt: Artificial Intelligence, Copyright, and Accountability in the 3A Era - The Human-Like Authors Are Already Here - A New Model.Michigan State Law Review,2017(4),659-721.
  49. Yen, A. C.(1990).Restoring the Natural Law: Copyright as Labor and Possession.Ohio State Law Journal,51,517-559.
  50. 上野達弘(2019)。人工知能と機械學習をめぐる著作権法上の課題：日本とヨーロッパにおける近時の動向。法律時報，91(8)，33-40。
  51. 上野達弘(2018)。著作権法改正が拓く日本の「機械學習パラダイス」。ビジネス法務，19(2)，1-10。
  52. 行政院（2018 年 6 月），《臺灣 AI 行動計畫（2018-2021）》，載於：https://digi.nstc.gov.tw/File/4C622B6A10053DAD。
  53. 李安(2020)。機器學習作品的著作權法分析：非作品性使用、合理使用與侵權使用。電子知識產權，6，60-70。
  54. 沈宗倫(2018)。人工智慧科技與智慧財產權法制的交會與調和：以著作權法與專利權法之權利歸屬為中心。人工智慧相關法律議題芻議
  55. 科技部（2019），《人工智慧科研發展指引》，載於：https://ai.iias.sinica.edu.tw/wpcontent/uploads/2019/08/%E7%A7%91%E6%8A%80%E9%83%A8%E4%BA%BA%E5%B7%A5%E6%99%BA%E6%85%A7%E7%A7%91%E7%A0%94%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E6%8C%87%E5%BC%95AITechnologyRDGuidelines108%E5%B9%B49%E6%9C%88%E7%89%88.pdf。
  56. 張金平(2019)。人工智慧作品合理使用困境及其解決。環球法律評論，2019(3)，120-132。
  57. 張嘉麟(2002)。論我國著作權法之強制授權許可機制：以強制授權許可之結構分析為中心。智慧財產權月刊，45，71-89。
  58. 章忠信(2019)。利益均衡的著作權法制：歐盟著作權指令之新思維探討。智慧財產權與法律風險析論：人工智慧商業時代的來臨
  59. 章忠信(2003)。著作權保護、科技發展與合理使用：談新著作權法關於合理使用的已然與未然。2003 年全國科技法律研討會論文集
  60. 章忠信(2015)。強制授權之緣起與發展：從著作權法制談起。第六屆歐盟與東亞智慧財產權國際學術研討會「著作權金合理支付機制之探討」，臺北:
  61. 馮震宇(2020)。從人類創作到 AI 創作：智財權利主體與權利歸屬之挑戰。月旦法學教室，212，34-43。
  62. 奧邨弘司(2017)。人工知能が生み出したコンテンツと著作権：著作物性を中心に。パテント，70(2)，10-19。
  63. 楊智傑(2018).美國著作權法：理論與重要判決.元照.
  64. 鄭冠宇(2021).民法總則.新學林.
  65. 謝銘洋(2021).智慧財產權法.元照.
  66. 謝銘洋,馮震宇,蔡明誠,陳逸南,陳家駿(2005).著作權法解讀.元照.
print cancel