Determining the Originality of AI-Generated Works: A Prompt-Based Perspective
- 1 Law School, University of International Business and Economics, Beijing, China
Abstract
In a landmark decision, the Beijing Internet Court became the first in the world to recognise the copyright status of an AI-generated image, marking a significant step forward in the legal treatment of such content. However, the question of the source of originality in such works remains unresolved. At the heart of this debate lies the question of whether the prompts provided by human users play a decisive role in determining the originality of AI-generated outputs. This article addresses this issue by examining the function of prompts in the generative process and evaluating their influence on the originality of the resulting work. Based on this analysis, the article proposes a dual-standard framework for evaluating the originality of AI-generated content, combining “authorial personality” with a “minimal degree of creativity”. This standard aims to reduce uncertainty in originality assessments and enhance the objectivity of legal determinations. The framework is designed to accommodate the characteristics of diverse work types, align with the principles of human creativity and the legislative intent of copyright law, and ultimately promote innovation and cultural flourishing.
- Beijing Haidian District People’s Court (2007). Civil Judgment No. (2007) Hai Min Chu Zi No. 25509.
- Beijing Internet Court (2023). Civil Judgment No. (2023) Jing 0491 Min Chu 11279. Beijing Internet Court.
- Burk, D. L. (2020). Thirty-Six Views of Copyright Authorship, by Jackson Pollock. Houston Law Review, 58, 1229-1262.
- Feist Publications, Inc (1991). Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340.
- Feng, X. (2023). Challenges, Problems, and Countermeasures Facing the Intellectual Property System in the Digital Environment. Social Sciences Front, No. 9, 198-212.
- Gasser, F. (2013). German Copyright Law (p. 4). Intellectual Property Publishing House.
- Leutheusser, T. (2019). German Copyrigh t Law (H. Zhang, & Y. Wu Trans.) (2nd ed., pp. 26-27). China Renmin University Press.
- Li, C. (2013). A Critique of Fundamental Theories of Copyright (p. 141). Intellectual Property Publishing House.
- Li, M. D. (2014). U.S. Intellectual Property Law (2nd ed., p. 248). Law Press China.
- Li, Y. (2019). Fundamental Principles of Copyright Law (p. 33). Intellectual Property Publishing House.
- Li, Z. Z. (2024). An Empirical Analysis and Normative Pathway of Originality in Works. https://www.zhichanli.com/p/1066131442
- Lipschitz, D. (2000). Copyright and Neighboring Rig hts (United Nations Trans., p. 43). China Translation and Publishing Corporation.
- Loewenheim, U. (1991). The Concept of a Work (C. Zheng Trans.). Copyright, No. 3, 45-48.
- Lu, H. J. (2014). On the Object of Copyright (p. 128). Intellectual Property Publishing House.
- Lyu, B. (2023). Reconstructing the Legal Fiction of Authorship in Copyright Law for the Age of Artificial Intelligence. Nanjing Social Sciences, No. 10, 90-103.
- Quintais, J. P. (2025). Generative AI, Copyright and the AI Act. Computer Law & Security Review, 56, Article ID: 106107.
- Smith, C. S. (2023). Mom, Dad, I Want to Be a Prompt Engineer. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/craigsmith/2023/04/05/mom-dad-i-want-to-be-a-prompt-engineer/
- Supreme People’s Court of China (n.d.). I nterpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Civil Disputes Involving Copyright (Art. 15).