• Menu
  • Skip to right header navigation
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to secondary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Before Header

Call us now  07 4688 2188

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Clifford Gouldson Lawyers

  • About
    • Our Origin Story
    • Our Future
    • Toowoomba
    • Brisbane
    • Sunshine Coast
    • What our clients say!
  • Careers
  • Supporting our Community
    • Bringing art to the business world
  • Contact Us
  • Search
  • About
    • Our Origin Story
    • Our Future
    • Toowoomba
    • Brisbane
    • Sunshine Coast
    • What our clients say!
  • Careers
  • Supporting our Community
    • Bringing art to the business world
  • Contact Us
  • Search

Mobile Menu

  • Our Team
  • Practice Areas
  • Knowledge
  • Events
  • Industries
  • For Individuals
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Our Team
  • Practice Areas
  • Knowledge
  • Events
  • Industries
  • For Individuals

The Rise of the Machines | Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Risks

You are here: Home / CGLaw / The Rise of the Machines | Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Risks

With the sudden rise of Artificial Intelligence (‘AI’) in platforms including Chat GPT, Jasper Chat, Dall-E etc, arise new risks for individuals and businesses.

Have you asked yourself: who owns the copyright in the content produced in response to my prompts?

Might there be copyright and other intellectual property implications arising from the rise of the machines? 

Can content generated by AI infringe copyright?

Whilst it is yet to be confirmed under Australian law, there is a serious risk that content generated by AI systems could infringe the copyright of a third party.

This risk stems from how AI systems work.

Generative AI tools are invariably trained by data and some of the data is protected by copyright. ChatGPT, for example, is fed on large amounts of data from the internet, some of which material will be subject to copyright protection. The system is then trained to produce written works that mimic a certain style or respond in a specific way. These outputs may be similar or even identical to existing works that are subject to copyright. At the very least, the outputs will, to varying degrees, be highly likely to be based on the prior works. The difference between a generative AI tool and a human is that a human can perceive prior works by the senses and doesn’t need to copy the prior work by encoding them, as AI “artists” must do.

Could a user who distributes the response without permission from the original copyright owner be infringing the original author’s copyright?

Theoretically, yes.  Under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (‘the Act’) the copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work is infringed by a person who, not being the owner of the copyright and without the licence of the owner of the copyright, does in Australia, or authorises the doing in Australia of, any act comprised in the copyright.  In the instance of a literary work reproducing the work could amount to infringement.

An output from AI has yet to be held to have infringed copyright in Australia. While it isn’t clear if ChatGPT’s model alters original works enough to avoid infringement, it is important to be cautious of the fact that the infringement risk extends to the user of AI platforms.

Who owns the rights to the output from the AI?

Other important questions for consideration are who owns the rights to the outputs from AI, and if there is a copyright attributable to the outputs.

ChatGPT’s Terms of Use, for example, state that subject to compliance with the Terms, OpenAI assigns the rights, interests and title in the generated  “output” to the user who enters the “inputs” to receive the generated content. Notably, the terms come with the caveat that outputs are owned by the user subject to the extent permitted by applicable law and, in Australia, this is the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (‘The Act’).

The Act defines a qualified person to hold copyright and therefore assigns it as “an Australian citizen or person … resident in Australia or a body corporate incorporated under a law of the Commonwealth or of a State.”

As an AI platform is neither a person nor body corporate within Australia, copyright is unlikely to exist in the outputs, and as such cannot be assigned to users.

This might explain the position being taken by OpenAI, for example, with ChatGPT, where they purport to assign the rights, interests and title in the generated “output” to the user.

Further, in Commissioner of Patents v Thaler [2022] FCAFC 62, the Full Federal Court held that legislative schemes are designed to only recognise people with a “legal personality” as an actual inventor. Without legislation that specifies otherwise, it is unlikely that AI can be the creator of copyrightable material.

If it is held that copyright does not exist in the outputted materials then users of the owners of the platform would not be able to enforce rights under copyright in Australia anyway.

This doesn’t necessarily undermine the rights of the original owner of the work from which the AI platform sourced material or content to inform its “output”.

If copyright is infringed, who is the copyright infringer?

Another important question is whether the user of the platform ][is responsible for any breaches of copyright. 

As canvassed already, the Act specifies that where infringement occurs, the infringer is the person who does, or who authorises the doing of, the acts comprised in the owners copyright. The application of this principle to the owners of AI tools or applications like ChatGPT is unknown at this stage, and comes down to how ChatGPT works in practice and if it has been trained to ensure that it does not reproduce a substantial part of a copyrighted work.

Whilst there are undoubtedly benefits to using artificial intelligence, we warn you to be wary of the risks associated with doing so and to stay up to date with any legislative changes surrounding this issue.

What steps should be taken?

It will be important that your business or organisation develops a policy on the use of AI. 

Your team should also be trained in their use of AI, including the skills associated with prompt engineering and output use.

Our intellectual property team can assist.


For further information please contact Ben Gouldson, Director.

Previous Post: « Project Trust Account Rollout Extended
Next Post: AAT decision confirms work from home injury liability »

Primary Sidebar

We can help

Ben Gouldson

Managing Director and Trade Marks Attorney*

Melanie Sharpe

Lawyer

Nicola Hayden

Lawyer and Trade Marks Attorney*

Brooke Giblin

Legal Secretary & Personal Assistant

Related Alerts

April 9, 2025
Yes, crypto currency is personal property!

The legal system has taken some time to come to grips with crypto currency,...

Privacy & AI: How much does your AI know?

There have been a number of changes to Australia’s privacy laws recently and businesses...

March 5, 2025
Recent Decision on Copyright Infringement: a Puff Piece

In December 2024, the Federal Court of Australia handed down a judgment on a...

View other alerts

Footer

Clifford Gouldson Lawyers

CLIFFORD GOULDSON LAWYERS
P: 07 4688 2188
F: 07 4688 2199
mail@cglaw.com.au
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Locations

TOOWOOMBA (Head Office)
259 Ruthven Street,
Toowoomba Q 4350

PO Box 8208,
Toowoomba South Q 4350

Toowoomba Office

BRISBANE
Level 5, 231 George Street,
Brisbane Q 4000

PO Box 12802 George Street,
Brisbane Q 4003

Brisbane Office

 

SUNSHINE COAST
Regatta Corporate Building, Office 3,
Ground Floor, Innovation Parkway,
Birtinya Q 4575

Locked Bag 5010
Caloundra DC Q 4551

Sunshine Coast Office

Practice Areas

  • Property + Business Transactions
  • Workplace
  • Litigation + Dispute Resolution
  • Intellectual Property + Technology
  • Wills, Estates, Planning + Structuring
  • Business + Corporate Advisory
  • Construction
  • Privacy & Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use

Site Footer

CG Law (Trading) Pty Ltd ACN 143 426 028 t/a Clifford Gouldson Lawyers ABN 89 143 426 028 Liability limited by a scheme approved under professional standards legislation.

The contents of this website are provided solely for general information purposes and do not constitute legal or other professional advice. Clifford Gouldson Lawyers expressly disclaims any liability arising from the use or reliance on the information provided. If you require legal or other expert advice or assistance, then you should seek our help or the services of a qualified professional.

Copyright © 2025 Clifford Gouldson Lawyers · Privacy & Disclaimer · Terms of Use · Marketing by John Gray Marketing · Site by Kingfisher