@CraigCarys argues that If we begin with the idea of a dialogic nature, this should pave the way to technical questions about particular instances of why authorship matters. #werobot@MiamiLawSchool
Q: Zoo or elephant, who owns the right to an elephant's paintings? A: It depends on how much direction the elephant is receiving. #werobot@MiamiLawSchool
Q: Could a monkey infringe a patent by making a tool? if so, what's the difference to a machine? & re copyright, should monkeys be authors? #werobot@MiamiLawSchool
W/ divided infringement, there are digital steps that are split among diff entities. If ur patentee and have rights to certain steps, AI is avoiding infringement by dividing up the steps. #werobot@MiamiLawSchool
A big concern of @CraigCarys is the notion of "if we don't protect it, we don't value it." But art is created despite copyright, an AI might generate beautiful art without that copyright. #WeRobot@MiamiLawSchool
An emerging trend is the negotiation between the inventor and patent office. Prev it was human inventors, but now AI is involved in the process with patent tools. #werobot@MiamiLawSchool
@CraigCarys: If the romantic author is dead, then we think the AI author should have been dead on arrival. If not, we should kill it! Great ending to her panel. #werobot@MiamiLawSchool
@CraigCarys says the notion that calling someone an author allows the author to function/control that text. It stabilizes the text as an easily modifiable static object. This is why it matters who is speaking. #werobot@MiamiLawSchool
@SaritMizrahi AI does not create in any sense copyright, so there is no reason for the public to build a protection of copyright for AI's intellectual creativity. #werobot@MiamiLawSchool
@SaritMizrahi is starting with her paper, Jack of All Trades, Master of None: Is Copyright Protection Justified for Robotic Faux-riginality? #werobot@MiamiLawSchool
Thank you to Professor Colin Jones and Professor Hideyuki Matsumi for their presentation on "The Robot Koseki" we will begin again after a 10 minute break at #WeRobot watch live at: https://t.co/H01QlbmHXL
@mfroomkin asks: Isn't assigning rights and liabilities a fact-specific inquiry?
A: Professor Colin Jones of Doshisha Law School says robots pose new problems that a registry will help with, like who has possession of a wallet that a robot picks up? #WeRobot@MiamiLawSchool
Q: From a legal perspective, what does a registry get you?
A: The proposed informational aspects of this system would help people to identify the rights and liabilities associated with the robot.
- Professor Colin Jones of Doshisha Law School #WeRobot@MiamiLawSchool
American law lacks a central identity. So a unified system of identity for people, which is seen in Japan, can seem to many to be un-American. This may have implications for a registration of robots. - Professor Colin Jones of Doshisha Law School #WeRobot@MiamiLawSchool