About the Journal
Editorial Board
Scientific Council
Reviewers
Ethical Code
AI Policy
Special Issue
GDRP - information on the processing of personal data
Terms of the journal
Indexing
Licenses & Access
Archive
For Authors
Publishing Policy
Technical instruction for the authors
Agreement CC BY-SA
Copyright statement
Publication procedure
Peer Review Process
Reviewer’s form .doc
Reviewer’s form .pdf
Contact
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Scientific Council
Reviewers
Ethical Code
AI Policy
Special Issue
GDRP - information on the processing of personal data
Terms of the journal
Indexing
Licenses & Access
ORIGINAL PAPER
Artificial intelligence tools used in ChatGPT and intellectual property protection
1
Uniwersytet Śląski w Katowicach
Submission date: 2024-12-12
Acceptance date: 2025-08-11
Publication date: 2025-10-31
JoMS 2025;63(3):382-407
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Objectives:
The aim of the article was to examine how the world of science and decision-makers reacted to the emergence of artificial intelligence tools in the form of ChatGPT. The article examines whether this tool can be used in scientific work in accordance with the principles of intellectual property protection. The growing interest in artificial intelligence prompts us to look for ways to use AI tools for our own creativity.
Material and methods:
Scientific publications on ChatGPT and intellectual property protection were examined. An analysis of legal provisions in Poland and Europe regarding the protection of intellectual property was carried out. An empirical study was performed using the ChatGPT language model.
Results:
The research concluded that the independent generation of scientific content by ChatGPT is defective. The use of ChatGPT in scientific research requires verification of content with ethical principles and copyright. Liability for violating these rights rests with the user. The experiment proved that ChatGPT is a "robot assistant" tool.
Conclusions:
The use of ChatGPT in scientific research may violate intellectual property laws. It is necessary to verify the content with your own research and with ethical principles and copyright laws. ChatGPT is only a tool that must be used by the user with respect for intellectual property rights. The level of use of the researched tool for writing a scientific paper must be subject to certain rules and cannot take place without human creative input into this process. The procedure for using AI presented in the article can guarantee respect for the law regarding the protection of intellectual property.
The aim of the article was to examine how the world of science and decision-makers reacted to the emergence of artificial intelligence tools in the form of ChatGPT. The article examines whether this tool can be used in scientific work in accordance with the principles of intellectual property protection. The growing interest in artificial intelligence prompts us to look for ways to use AI tools for our own creativity.
Material and methods:
Scientific publications on ChatGPT and intellectual property protection were examined. An analysis of legal provisions in Poland and Europe regarding the protection of intellectual property was carried out. An empirical study was performed using the ChatGPT language model.
Results:
The research concluded that the independent generation of scientific content by ChatGPT is defective. The use of ChatGPT in scientific research requires verification of content with ethical principles and copyright. Liability for violating these rights rests with the user. The experiment proved that ChatGPT is a "robot assistant" tool.
Conclusions:
The use of ChatGPT in scientific research may violate intellectual property laws. It is necessary to verify the content with your own research and with ethical principles and copyright laws. ChatGPT is only a tool that must be used by the user with respect for intellectual property rights. The level of use of the researched tool for writing a scientific paper must be subject to certain rules and cannot take place without human creative input into this process. The procedure for using AI presented in the article can guarantee respect for the law regarding the protection of intellectual property.
License
REFERENCES (38)
2.
Anechitaoe, C. (2023). Intelectual Property versus Artificial Inteligence. Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, 1(23), 2–6.
3.
Bar, A. (2022). Prawo autorskie w erze sztucznej inteligencji. Uwagi na tle historii „Portretu Edmonda de Belmy”, PME, 1,17–25.
4.
Barta, J., Markiewicz R. (2021). Prawo autorskie i prawa pokrewne. Warszawa, Wolters Kluwer.
5.
Bello, C. (2024). The best AI tools to power your academic research https://www.euronews.com/next/... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
7.
Cooper, A.F., Lee, K., Grimmelmann, J., Ippolito, D. i in. (2023). Report of the 1st Workshop on Generative AI and Law, arXiv:2311.06477 (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
9.
COPE (2023). Authorship and AI tools – COPE position statement. 13 February 2023, https://publicationethics.org/... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
10.
Dyrektywa (2009)/24/WE w sprawie ochrony prawnej programów komputerowych, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
11.
Dyrektywa (2019) w sprawie prawa autorskiego i praw pokrewnych na jednolitym rynku cyfrowym (dyrektywa o jednolitym rynku cyfrowym), z dnia 17 kwietnia 2019 r., https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
12.
European Patent Office (2018). Report of the IP5 expert round table on artificial intelligence, EPO, Munich, 31 October 2018, https://www.fiveipoffices.org/... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
13.
European Patent Office. (2018). Report of the IP5 expert round table on artificial intelligence, EPO, Munich, 31 October 2018, https://www.fiveipoffices.org/....
15.
Ferenc-Szydełko, E. (2016). Komentarz do art. 1. W: E. Ferenc-Szydełko (red.), Ustawa o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych. Komentarz, Legalis/el. 2016, nb. 12.
16.
Guadamuz, A. (2016). The Monkey Selfie: Copyright Lessons for Originality in Photographs and Internet Jurisdiction (March 21, 2016). Internet Policy Review, DOI: 10.14763/2016.1.398 (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
17.
Iszkowski, W., Tadeusiewicz, R. (2023). Na marginesie dyskusji o sztucznej inteligencji. Nauka, 4, 49–70, DOI: 10.24425/nauka.2023.148227 (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
19.
Kalinowski, M. (2024). Czy, komu i w jakim zakresie przysługują prawa do wytworów generatywnej sztucznej inteligencji? Analiza prawna z perspektywy warunków użytkowania MidJourney. Prawo i Więź, 1(48), 259–280, https://doi.org/10.36128/PRIW.... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
20.
Kavia, A., Sharma, K.S. (2023). ChatGPT and Copyright: Legal and Ethical Challenges. Osmania University Journal of IPR [OUJIPR] SSRN, 1 (July 14, 2023), 172–189, https://ssrn.com/abstract=4848... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
21.
Komisja publikuje ocenę art. 17 ust. 6 dyrektywy (UE) 2019/790. 15 listopada 2024 r., https://digital-strategy.ec.eu... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
22.
Konieczna, A. (2019). Problematyka sztucznej inteligencji w świetle prawa autorskiego,. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace z Prawa Własności Intelektualnej, 4 ,104–116.
23.
Li, X., Zhang, T. (2017). An Exploration on Artificial Intelligence Application: From Security, Privacy and Ethic Perspective. IEEE 2nd (ICCCBDA) .
24.
Lin, Z. (2024). Beyond principlism: Practical strategies for ethical AI use in research practices. AI and Ethics. AI and Ethics, DOI: 10.1007/s43681-024-00585-5 (dostęp: 8.12.2024)._.
25.
Logue, F. (2014). Monkey see, Monkey do. Gazette of the Law Society Ireland, 108(8), 27–29.
27.
Nazarovets, S., Teixeira da Silva, J.A. (2024). ChatGPT as an ,,author”: Bibliometric analysis to assess the validity of authorship. Accountability in Research, 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1080/089896... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
29.
OpenAI. (2024). Odpowiedź wygenerowana przez ChatGPT (listopad 22, 2024). OpenAI. https://platform.openai.com (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
30.
Pournaras, E. (2023). Science in the Era of ChatGPT, Large Language Models and Generative AI: Challenges for Research Ethics and How to Respond,https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
31.
Rezolucja Parlamentu Europejskiego z dnia 16 lutego 2017 r. zawierająca zalecenia dla Komisji w sprawie przepisów prawa cywilnego dotyczących robotyki (2015/2103(INL)) Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej (2018/C 252/25), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/lega... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
32.
Rozporządzenie (2024) Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) 2024/1689 z dnia 13 czerwca 2024 r. w sprawie ustanowienia zharmonizowanych przepisów dotyczących sztucznej inteligencji oraz zmiany rozporządzeń (WE) nr 300/2008, (UE) nr 167/2013, (UE) nr 168/2013, (UE) 2018/858, (UE) 2018/1139 i (UE) 2019/2144 oraz dyrektyw 2014/90/UE, (UE) 2016/797 i (UE) 2020/1828 (akt w sprawie sztucznej inteligencji) (Tekst mający znaczenie dla EOG) PE/24/2024/REV/1 Dz.U. L. 2024/1689, 12.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
33.
Sacha, G. (2019). Sztuczna inteligencja a prawo autorskie. Przegląd Prawno-Ekonomiczny, 47(2), 63–77.
34.
Sail, A. (2023). Chat GPT and Intellectual Property Rights (May 11, 2023), http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
35.
Tang, B.L. (2024). Did ChatGPT ask or agree to be a (co)author? ChatGPT authorship reflects the wider problem of inappropriate authorship practices. Science Editing, 11(2), 93–95, https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.3... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
37.
van Woudenberg, R., Ranalli, C. Bracker, D. (2024). Authorship and ChatGPT: a Conservative View. Philosophy and Technology, 37, 34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
38.
Wolność słowa i prawo do informacji w sieci, https://www.prawo.pl/prawo/wol... (dostęp: 8.12.2024).
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 2391-789X |
| ISSN: | 1734-2031 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
