TUHH Open Research
Help
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  • English
  • Deutsch
  • Communities & Collections
  • Publications
  • Research Data
  • People
  • Institutions
  • Projects
  • Statistics
  1. Home
  2. TUHH
  3. Publications
  4. Inspirational responsibility, intellectual property, and AI training
 
Options

Inspirational responsibility, intellectual property, and AI training

Citation Link: https://doi.org/10.15480/882.17114
Publikationstyp
Journal Article
Date Issued
2026-05-01
Sprache
English
Author(s)
Bozenhard, Jonas 
Ethics in Technology E-EXK8  
TORE-DOI
10.15480/882.17114
TORE-URI
https://hdl.handle.net/11420/63104
Journal
Philosophy & technology  
Volume
39
Article Number
88
Citation
Philosophy & Technology 39: 88 (2026)
Publisher DOI
10.1007/s13347-026-01099-0
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-105038018244
Publisher
Springer
Generative AI systems, including large language models and image or video generators, are typically trained on data scraped from the internet. Since the creators of the works used for AI training have often neither consented to nor been compensated for such use, this has led to allegations of “theft”. At the same time, since generative AI models do not store copies of their training data, there is a widespread view that they no not necessarily infringe copyright. Moreover, in human creative practice, drawing inspiration from and learning from the works of others is common, if not unavoidable. The central challenge, then, is to formulate an intellectual property right that allows creators to restrict AI training without limiting human learning and creativity. McIntyre ( 2026 ) proposes new strategies for addressing this challenge, most notably through an argument relying on proprietary rights. Critically engaging with this approach, I argue that it overlooks the power dynamics in the art world and leaves creators in a vulnerable and dependent position. Instead, I outline a different pathway to restricting AI training that centres on what I call “inspirational responsibility”. This concept captures the responsibility creators bear for how they use and engage with the work of others. Since human creators can be held inspirationally responsible, whereas AI models cannot, the notion of inspirational responsibility provides a normatively relevant basis for restricting AI training without imposing parallel constraints on human learning and creativity.
Subjects
AI ethics
Intellectual property
Training data
Creativity
Responsibility
DDC Class
006.3: Artificial Intelligence
170: Ethics (Moral Philosophy)
340: Law
Funding(s)
Projekt DEAL  
Lizenz
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Publication version
publishedVersion
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name

13347_2026_Article_1099.pdf

Type

Main Article

Size

658.81 KB

Format

Adobe PDF

TUHH
Weiterführende Links
  • Contact
  • Send Feedback
  • Cookie settings
  • Privacy policy
  • Impress
DSpace Software

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4Science
Design by effective webwork GmbH

  • Deutsche NationalbibliothekDeutsche Nationalbibliothek
  • ORCiD Member OrganizationORCiD Member Organization
  • DataCiteDataCite
  • Re3DataRe3Data
  • OpenDOAROpenDOAR
  • OpenAireOpenAire
  • BASE Bielefeld Academic Search EngineBASE Bielefeld Academic Search Engine
Feedback