Welcome to visit ACADEMIC MONTHLY，Today is

Chinese
Volume 58 Issue 8
August 2026
Article Contents

    Citation: WANG Qian. AI-Generated Content and Copyright Liability: Paradoxes and Resolutions[J]. Academic Monthly, 2026, 58(8): 118-132. shu

    AI-Generated Content and Copyright Liability: Paradoxes and Resolutions

    • Abstract

      AI-generated content may be identical or substantially similar to protected works of others,raising issues of infringement determination and liability. When AI-generated content is substantially similar to another's work but exhibits originality in form,it does not qualify as a work under copyright law. However,the definition of derivative rights in the Copyright Law requires the creation of a derivative work,leading to a paradox in determining infringement of such rights. Based on the principle of separability between infringement standards and rights-generation standards,this paradox can be resolved by interpreting the term “work” in the definition of derivative rights to include “other content with the appearance of a work”. Furthermore,when AI generates content identical or substantially similar to protected works,it is not the result of acts regulated by exclusive rights carried out by developers,operators,or users,creating another paradox:the harm exists without an identifiable infringer. This can be addressed by classifying AI as a “product”,designating developers and operators as “producers”,and applying product liability rules under a reasonable interpretation of “product defects”.
    • 加载中

    • References

    • Access

      1. [1]

        LIN Xifen ,  FU Zhangyi . How Does Public Trust in the Judiciary Shape Acceptability of Judges' AI-assisted Adjudications——An Empirical Study Based on Questionnaire Data. Academic Monthly, 2026, 58(8): 133-144.

      2. [2]

        WAN Yong ,  LI Yalan . Realizing the Function of Copyright Law in the Era of Artificial Intelligence. Academic Monthly, 2026, 58(7): 104-116.

      3. [3]

        YU Jianxing ,  LIU Yuxuan . Beyond the Outside Observer: Repositioning the Social Sciences in the Era of Large Language Models. Academic Monthly, 2026, 58(7): 77-89.

      4. [4]

        YOU Yang . How Does AI Understand Language Meaning. Academic Monthly, 2026, 58(8): 16-28.

      5. [5]

        HE Da'an ,  LI Huaizheng . Digital Adjustment Mechanism in the Application of Artificial General Intelligence. Academic Monthly, 2026, 58(7): 54-63.

      6. [6]

        ZHANG Yi . Cognitive Transformation in Historical Research in the Age of AI——“Fluency-Induced Occlusion” in LLM-Assisted Reading of Diplomatic Manuscripts. Academic Monthly, 2026, 58(8): 29-40.

      7. [7]

        ZHAO Lin ,  ZHANG Boyu ,  LIANG Hua . The Relationship Between Monopoly and Innovation in Information Product Markets——A Growth Network Perspective. Academic Monthly, 2026, 58(7): 64-76.

      8. [8]

        XU Xiangdong . Consciousness and The Moral Status of AI Agents. Academic Monthly, 2026, 58(8): 5-15.

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML
    Entire Issue PDF

    Article Metrics

    Article views: 25 Times PDF downloads: 1 Times Cited by: 0 Times

    Metrics
    • PDF Downloads(1)
    • Abstract views(25)
    • HTML views(7)
    • Latest
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
          通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
          • 1. 

            沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

          1. 本站搜索
          2. 百度学术搜索
          3. 万方数据库搜索
          4. CNKI搜索

          AI-Generated Content and Copyright Liability: Paradoxes and Resolutions

          Abstract: AI-generated content may be identical or substantially similar to protected works of others,raising issues of infringement determination and liability. When AI-generated content is substantially similar to another's work but exhibits originality in form,it does not qualify as a work under copyright law. However,the definition of derivative rights in the Copyright Law requires the creation of a derivative work,leading to a paradox in determining infringement of such rights. Based on the principle of separability between infringement standards and rights-generation standards,this paradox can be resolved by interpreting the term “work” in the definition of derivative rights to include “other content with the appearance of a work”. Furthermore,when AI generates content identical or substantially similar to protected works,it is not the result of acts regulated by exclusive rights carried out by developers,operators,or users,creating another paradox:the harm exists without an identifiable infringer. This can be addressed by classifying AI as a “product”,designating developers and operators as “producers”,and applying product liability rules under a reasonable interpretation of “product defects”.

            HTML

          Relative (8)

          目录

          沪ICP备16024018号-1  沪公网安备 31010102003103号

          ICCAS
           Chinese Chemical Society

          Address： 邮政编码：200020

          Telephone：021－53060399、53069080 Email：xsyk021@163.com

          Supported by Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co. Ltd Technical ： info@rhhz.net

          /

          DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
          Return