Next-level AI: does the rise of arti cial general and super-human intelligence mark the end of IP?
01 June 2024
Intelligence levels beyond AI as we currently know will require a complete rethink of intellectual property and the IP system, argues Clark W Lackert, deputy general counsel at the World Trade Centers Association, in this week’s opinion column We therefore need to look beyond ‘ narrow AI’ and start discussing the issues of arti cial general and superhuman intelligence now, Lackert insists
The 21st Century thus far has presented many challenges to IP rights, from the geopolitical discord making new treaties dif cult, to the challenges in creating an IP regime in the legal vacuum of outer space (which I have commented on), to the expanding ease of IP infringement created by technologies such as the Internet, mobile phones and social media However, the most obvious – yet most ignored – technological challenge to intellectual property now is the exponential growth of AI and the rapidly approaching arrival of human-level computer intelligence called ‘arti cial general intelligence’ (AGI), and thereafter super-human intelligence (many times greater than humans) called ‘arti cial superintelligence’ (ASI)
We need to brie y review the state of play and pose some unanswered inquiries, since we cannot obtain the right answers about AI if we do not ask the right questions
The present-day IP law commentators who have reviewed the current state of AI affairs whereby humans direct AI (socalled ‘ narrow AI’, including generative AI) as a tool to undertake certain tasks (eg, creating works of art, searching the Internet for counterfeits and trademark infringements, and devising patentable inventions) try to answer questions such as can software be an author, a trademark owner or an inventor?
Issues from narrow AI also arise in areas such as deceiving the public with visual or audio deepfakes – for example, to what level can name, image and likeness be protected? Does data-scraping websites and publications for erudite human-like answers by large language model chatbots constitute fair use?
However, little had been written about what is around the next corner – namely, the rapidly approaching age of AGI and thereafter ASI, where software thinks on its own and writes its own code, with no or limited human guidance Apart from this development, soon humanity will not even understand AI conversations beyond our so-called ‘cognitive horizon’ In these worlds, humans will have little – if any – input into IP development, monetisation, protection and enforcement processes, yet the impact on humans is clear
The rise of AGI and ASI is much more than the traditional scienti c ‘paradigm shift’ (eg, moving the written word from books to the Internet); rather, it is a completely different way to view the foundations of intellectual property and how it is protected
For followers of these developments, the timeline is constantly changing for AGI, with ASI shortly thereafter, but AGI could arrive within the “next few years ” Huge leaps are bound to happen unexpectedly – as when OpenAI’s SORA video AI creations appeared suddenly on 15 February 2024, causing lmmaker Tyler Perry to cancel his planned $800 million investment in a new movie studio after seeing we he called its “shocking” AI video creations
As usual, the law lags beyond technology, as it does with outer space, the Internet and now AI We need to at least discuss several of these critical AI issues now before AGI is upon us Instead of focusing on whether we can squeeze AI into traditional IP models with questions such as can non-human sources be considered authors, brand creators, or inventors, we may need to look at a possible parallel system for use with our new sentient machine companions cohabiting on Earth and later in outer space
What are some of the questions to be asked now, before AGI arrives? To name a top 10, but by no means complete, list:
What do traditional IP rights mean for computer-generated works with no human input?
How do we designate ownership for these IP creations, if at all?
How do we create ethical alignment between IP creations and human aspirations?
What does ‘exclusivity’ for IP rights mean in the AGI context?
Will AGI IP rights have limited duration such as copyrights when human lifetimes and human ‘moral rights’ are irrelevant?
Will there be ‘territorial’ rights when the software which created the intellectual property is on the Internet or in outer space?
What compensation system, if any, will be available, since our current IP approach is to reward the IP creator either directly or indirectly?
How do we decide trademark likelihood of confusion and who is a consumer when the buying and selling of products is done by autonomous AGI agents with no human direction?
Will we even need intellectual property in the world when AGI can manufacture creative products as open source results, which are free to use by all?
Who or what will protect humanity from counterfeits, infringements, contaminated or poisoned products, unfair competition, free riding, and general public source confusion, since current intellectual property is both personal property and a safeguard for consumer protection?
When AGI and later ASI arrive, perhaps we can develop a new global system dealing with computer-generated creative products working with them cooperatively within the current IP framework (eg, we may legislate that software can be considered an author, a trademark owner or an inventor under our current understanding of what intellectual property is)
Better yet, we will have already promulgated a possible alternative IP-like system, which incorporates AGI concerns into innovative ways to regulate, protect, enforce and monetise IP rights in a very different world than existed when the original global IP treaty, the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property 1883, was nalised and signed 141 years ago – when electricity itself was rst harnessed Only then can we be ahead of the curve and not have our global IP system ship sunk by the oncoming, yet hidden, AI iceberg
This commentary re ects the views of the author alone, and does not represent the views of any other association, organisation or employer
Clark W Lackert Deputy General Counsel World Trade Centers Association clackert@wtca org