ChatGPT, which has been hailed as a breakthrough on the scale of the steam engine and the Internet, is considered an innovation that could significantly accelerate the process of developing society 5.0. Its essentially almost unlimited access to vast databases may in the near future become a kind of example of the possibility of expanding human capabilities, turning a human into someone with qualities significantly beyond their typical conditioning.
Quite a lot has already been written about ChatGPT's functionalities; however, looking through the specifics of selected industries or market sectors, including, in particular, the creative industries and education it still seems to be only the tip of the proverbial iceberg. For example, Amazon is steadily increasing its range of publications written by or in cooperation with ChatGPT. The publications range from poetry, non-fiction and guides to prose, including children's stories. Interestingly, for some of them the illustrations were made using another generative artificial intelligence tool, i.e. Dall-E2. So, will tools such as ChatGPT lead us to synergy or rather competition between humans and artificial intelligence?
To ban or to teach how to use?
The issue of potential ban on the use of ChatGPT at schools or universities is also being discussed, pointing out that it could involve a number of potential abuses and a number of papers written by artificial intelligence instead of pupils and students. The feasibility of enforcing this ban seems unrealistic and, above all, hardly justifiable in view of the challenges facing the education system. This can lead to a kind of pretence of action and a very illusory vision of the world in which ChatGPT does not actually exist.
So, rather than imposing further bans, it may be worth considering how to use such generative AI tools in education, making the learning process more attractive and bringing it closer to the environment in which young people function on a daily basis.
– emphasises Dr Dominika Kaczorowska-Spychalska from the Faculty of Management of the University of Lodz
The level of 'creativity' of works generated by the generative AI is also questionable. And although the process of its learning is in many ways analogous to that of a human being, the result is not always entirely satisfactory.
First and foremost, works created this way are accused of lacking uniqueness – the resulting work is, after all, the result of a kind of advanced processing of other works with which AI became familiar to some extent during the learning stage. They can therefore be perceived, as emerging research in this area confirms, as repetitive and with no originality effect.
– says Dr Dominika Kaczorowska-Spychalska
So, how do we measure the creativity and uniqueness of publications, graphics or images created using ChatGPT or other generative artificial intelligence tools? We will probably still have to wait for an answer to this question.
ChatGPT as a bibliographic source?
It also raises the question whether the use of ChatGPT is allowed from the point of view of the current law. The answer, of course, is yes – it's just another tool that helps you find information and get on with your work. However, the use of information obtained from ChatGPT is another issue.
Firstly, it is important to remember that it is not a perfect tool and often conveys distorted or false information, i.e. both erroneous and non-existent. For example, it cites very interesting court judgments which, however, have never been handed down or cites literature that does not exist. Secondly, it is not permitted to copy the content generated by ChatGPT.
– points out Dr Karolina Sztobryn from the Faculty of Law and Administration of the University of Lodz
Thus, the question arises whether ChatGPT can be cited as a bibliographic source. ChatGPT itself responds positively to this doubt and even indicates possible ways of citing it as a source of content, such as: "according to ChatGPT – OpenAI's artificial intelligence...", "a response generated by ChatGPT – OpenAI's artificial intelligence program...", or "according to ChatGPT – a computer program using artificial intelligence...". However, one should be very careful with the use of such a source, if only because it may generate inaccurate content. Therefore, by passing on false information, we contribute to its dissemination.
And even despite the fact that ChatGPT provides information on the sources it used to create the generated content, it sometimes refers to items that in fact do not exist. Therefore, the ethics of research and observation dictate getting to the source, not to the next reference. Copying content can therefore lead to copyright infringement.
– underlines Dr Karolina Sztobryn
What about copyright?
While ChatGPT itself, as a generative AI, does not own the copyright, such rights may belong to the author of the text that ChatGPT used to create the content. Furthermore, misappropriating the authorship of a work, or misrepresenting the authorship of both the whole work and even a part of the work, constitutes a violation of Article 115 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act and is punishable by a fine, restriction of liberty or imprisonment of up to three years.
However, the issue of copyright and the extent of the use of ChatGPT-generated content is one of many that relates to the legal issues associated with generative AI. In the context of copyright, it is also interesting to analyse the potential for infringement of content rights, which are the so-called inputs for artificial intelligence. Litigation of such cases is already taking place in the US and the UK. In the EU, this issue can be decided against the background of Articles 3 and 4 of Directive 2019/790 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market.
Also, from the perspective of EU law, specifically the proposal of the Artificial Intelligence Act (COM/2021/206 final), the further fate of generative AI such as ChatGPT can be analysed. This act will aim to ensure that artificial intelligence operates in a safe, ethical and fundamental rights-compliant manner. It cannot be considered that it will therefore jeopardise the possibility of using generative artificial intelligence, per se.
Principles of action are needed
With the progressive democratisation of generative artificial intelligence in market and social practice, the vision of free and substantive cooperation with technology, in various spaces of human activity, is no longer beyond our reach. So, when will ChatGPT do our work for us? It can already do many things, but it is up to us to decide for what purposes we actually need it. Moreover, the emerging reports of other similar solutions, as reported by Google or Baidu, enforce the need to develop clear rules that will allow the use of this type of tools in a credible and ethical manner, including taking into account the issue of intellectual property.
Dr Dominika Kaczorowska-Spychalska is the Director of the Centre for Intelligent Technologies at the Faculty of Management of the University of Lodz. She serves as the leader of the Research, Innovation and Implementation subgroup of the Working Group on Artificial Intelligence at the Chancellery of the Prime Minister. She is passionate about the impact of artificial intelligence on human behaviour and the extent and nature of the interaction between humans and technology. She is the author (in part co-author) of numerous publications published both in Poland and abroad. She was part of a group of specialists involved in the preparation of the "Foundations for AI strategy in Poland". She is a two-time winner of the Centre for Intelligent Development – Scientist of the Future competition. She strives to intensify cooperation between the world of science and research and its socio-economic environment on the national and international markets, for which she has received the award of the Minister of Science and Education this year.
Dr Karolina Sztobryn is a Doctor of Law, Assistant Professor at the Department of European Economic Law of the Faculty of Law and Administration of the University of Lodz. She is the author and co-author of publications on intellectual property law, unfair competition law and advertising law. Dr Karolina Sztobryn also deals with intellectual property law in practice as a Polish patent attorney and counsellor in trademark and design cases before the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). She is also a certified tutor.
Source: Faculty of Management, University of Lodz
Edit: Communications and PR Centre, University of Lodz
The mission of the University of Lodz is to conduct reliable research and actively disseminate facts and research results so as to wisely educate future generations, be useful to society and courageously respond to the challenges of the modern world. Scientific excellence is always our best compass. Our values include: courage, curiosity, commitment, cooperation and respect.