Legals Standard For Claims Copyright and Intellectual property by Author AI and Creators AI from Promt AI ?

UNESCO or Noble Prize Standard For Copyright ?                                                                                                                                         While neither UNESCO nor the Nobel Prize Organization has established specific, universally binding legal standards for claiming copyright or intellectual property rights for AI creators and prompts, their positions and principles offer valuable insights into the evolving global understanding of this issue within the context of scientific and cultural integrity. 

UNESCO's Stance:

UNESCO emphasizes the ethical dimensions of AI and its impact on culture, education, and research. Their "Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence" highlights several key principles relevant to your question:

 1. Human Agency and Oversight: UNESCO stresses the importance of maintaining human control and oversight over AI systems. This implies that the creative input and intellectual contribution of humans remain central to any claim of authorship or intellectual property.

  2. Transparency and Explainability: UNESCO advocates for transparency in AI systems, including the data and algorithms used. This principle suggests that the role of AI in generating content should be clear, which would necessitate proper referencing of prompts and models.

  3. Responsibility and Accountability: The recommendation emphasizes the responsibility of AI actors. In the context of scientific and cultural works, this suggests that humans using AI bear the responsibility for the integrity and originality of the final output.

 4. Intellectual Property Rights: UNESCO acknowledges the complex challenges that AI poses to existing intellectual property frameworks and calls for further reflection on these issues. They emphasize the need to balance the protection of creators with the public interest and access to knowledge.

  5. Cultural Diversity and Inclusion: UNESCO stresses that AI should not perpetuate biases and should promote diverse cultural expressions. This principle suggests that the use of AI should not undermine the originality and distinctiveness of human creativity rooted in specific cultural contexts.

Nobel Prize Organization's Stance:

The Nobel Prize Organization primarily focuses on recognizing groundbreaking achievements in various scientific and cultural fields. While they haven't issued specific legal standards on AI and intellectual property, their discussions and recognition of AI-related work offer some clues:

 6. Recognition of AI's Impact: The Nobel Prizes awarded in recent years to researchers whose work laid the foundation for modern AI demonstrate the organization's recognition of AI's significant impact on science.

 7. Emphasis on Human Achievement: The Nobel Prizes traditionally celebrate human ingenuity and discovery. This aligns with the broader principle in HKI that authorship and inventorship are fundamentally human endeavors.

 8. Focus on Original Contributions: The Nobel Prizes reward original and significant contributions to their respective fields. In the context of AI, this suggests that while AI can be a powerful tool, the novelty and impact of a work should still stem from the intellectual input and direction of the human creator.

 9. Ethical Considerations in Research: The Nobel Prize Organization upholds high ethical standards in scientific research. This aligns with the emphasis on transparency and proper attribution when using AI in scholarly work.

Global Trends and Lack of Universal Standards:

As you noted, there isn't a single, globally recognized legal standard from organizations like UNESCO or the Nobel Prize Organization defining precisely what AI creators and prompts can claim as copyright or HKI within scientific and cultural integrity. However, the following trends are evident:

 10. Human Creativity as the Cornerstone: The dominant global trend in HKI law still emphasizes human creativity as the basis for copyright.

 11. Evolving Legal Frameworks: Legal systems worldwide are grappling with how to adapt existing HKI laws to address AI-generated content.

 12. Ethical Guidelines Precede Legal Standards: In the scientific and academic communities, ethical guidelines emphasizing transparency and proper attribution of AI use are often more immediate and universally applied than specific legal standards for HKI ownership of prompts or outputs.

Conclusion:

While UNESCO and the Nobel Prize Organization haven't codified specific legal standards for AI creator and prompt HKI, their principles and recognition of AI's impact underscore the importance of:

 13. Attributing the use of AI transparently in scientific and cultural works.

 14. Recognizing human creativity and intellectual contribution as central to claims of authorship and HKI.

 16. Engaging in ongoing discussions about adapting legal frameworks to the realities of AI-generated content.

For now, the determination of what constitutes copyrightable or protectable intellectual property related to AI creators and prompts remains largely within the purview of national laws and evolving legal interpretations. The ethical standards promoted by organizations like UNESCO within the scientific and cultural communities serve as crucial guiding principles in the absence of universally binding legal definitions from these specific organizations.                                 (AI Creator +Asep Rohmandar +Prompt AI, Bandung 5/5/2025)