算法驱动型虚拟数字人涉侵权纠纷的规范解决路径
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

D923;D922.16;D922.17;TP18

基金项目:

2023年重庆市教委科学技术研究计划重点项目“元宇宙数字教师交互式未来课堂搭建模式研究”


The standardized solution path of infringement disputes involving virtual digital man driven by algorithm
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    算法驱动型虚拟数字人作为生成式人工智能的典型代表,能够在基于元数据投喂的基础上,通过对海量大数据(文本、图片、音频、视频等)自主解析与人类进行多维交互。搭载ChatGPT技术的虚拟数字人,将实现算法驱动+真人建模/虚拟形象相结合的3D场景化应用。其输出内容(人工智能生成物)包括音乐、舞蹈、文本等多种形式。算法驱动型虚拟数字人因具备交互性、数字化、拟人化、独特性四大特征,随之产生了虚拟数字人本身的权利保护和因其交互性而生成相关内容的权属划定等争议问题。第一类是算法驱动型虚拟数字人在研发之初,预训练数据采集和优化训练数据过程中对享有数据权利的主体造成的损害;第二类则是算法驱动型虚拟数字人自身或者对其享有财产权益的研发主体可能遭受的侵权。具体又可以分为由算法驱动型虚拟数字人自主产生的具有独创性内容的生成物所可能面临的权属争议和算法驱动型虚拟数字人基于不同的创作模式下产生的不同权属划归两种情形。运营公司单方创作的情形下,算法驱动型虚拟数字人的权益应划归运营公司,但如果用户也参与到虚拟数字人的创作过程中,又可以细分为“材料主义”“创作主义”与“合作主义”三种形式,分别对应着平台所有、用户所有和共有三种归属主体。现阶段,虚拟数字人作为一种数字化工具,并不具备拥有人格利益前提的人格尊严,因此不宜认定其具有独立人格,享有人格利益。通过对虚拟数字人各部分进行解构的方式,如肖像、名称、声音以及名誉所产生的利益主要采取“财产说”进行保护,而对虚拟数字人的名誉则通常采用“同一说”予以救济。另外,智能型虚拟数字人生成物可版权性问题本质上是基于深度学习技术的人工智能生成物的可版权性问题,学界存在将其是否纳入公共领域的争议。我国在生成式人工智能发展过程中可考虑探索人工智能统一立法的方式。具体而言,一是通过增强生成式人工智能服务提供者的大型基础设施服务义务来平衡其和政府之间的监管义务分配责任,二是从鼓励发展的角度建构起生成式人工智能服务提供者元数据采集的适度豁免规则,三是明确现阶段人工智能生成物不宜直接进入公共领域,其权属划分以服务提供者与使用者的约定为主。

    Abstract:

    As a typical representative of generative artificial intelligence, the algorithm-driven virtual digital human can interact with humans through autonomous analysis of massive big data (text, pictures, audio, video, etc.) on the basis of metadata feeding. The virtual digital human equipped with ChatGPT technology will realize the 3D scene application of algorithm-driven + human modeling/virtual image. Its output content (artificial intelligence products) includes music, dance, text and other forms. Because of the four characteristics of interactivity, digitization, personification and uniqueness, the algorithm-driven virtual digital human has produced controversial issues such as the protection of the rights of the virtual digital human itself and the demarcation of the ownership of the relevant content generated due to its interactivity.The first category is the damage caused by the algorithm-driven virtual digital human to the subject of data rights in the process of pre-training data collection and optimization of training data at the beginning of research and development; the second type is the infringement that the algorithm-driven virtual digital person itself or the R & D subject who has property rights and interests in it may suffer. Specifically, it can be divided into two situations:the ownership dispute that may be faced by the products with original content independently generated by the algorithm-driven virtual digital person and the different ownership classification generated by the algorithm-driven virtual digital person based on different creation modes. In the case of unilateral creation of the operating company, the rights and interests of the algorithm-driven virtual digital person should be classified into the operating company. However, if the user is also involved in the creation process of the virtual digital person, it can be subdivided into three forms:‘materialism',‘creationism' and ‘cooperationism', which correspond to the three ownership subjects of platform ownership, user ownership and common ownership.At present, as a digital tool, virtual digital people do not have the personal dignity of the premise of personal interests, so it is not appropriate to identify them as having independent personality and enjoying personal interests. By deconstructing the various parts of the virtual digital person, such as portrait, name, voice and reputation, the interests generated mainly adopt the ‘property theory' to protect, while the reputation of the virtual digital person is usually relieved by the ‘same theory'. In addition, the copyrightability of intelligent virtual digital human products is essentially the copyrightability of artificial intelligence products based on deep learning technology, and there is a controversy in the academic community about whether it should be included in the public domain.In the process of the development of generative artificial intelligence, China can consider exploring the way of unified legislation of artificial intelligence. Specifically, the first is to balance the distribution of regulatory obligations between the generated artificial intelligence service provider and the government by enhancing the large-scale infrastructure service obligations of the generated artificial intelligence service provider. The second is to construct a moderate exemption rule for the metadata collection of the generated artificial intelligence service provider from the perspective of encouraging development. The third is to clarify that the artificial intelligence product should not enter the public domain directly at this stage, and its ownership division is mainly based on the agreement between the service provider and the user.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

颜卉.算法驱动型虚拟数字人涉侵权纠纷的规范解决路径[J].重庆大学学报社会科学版,2024,30(2):182-194. DOI:10.11835/j. issn.1008-5831. fx.2023.10.003

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2024-05-08
  • 出版日期: