Originality and intellectual property in the era of AI design

Artificial intelligence has revolutionized the world of visual design, offering powerful tools that expand creative possibilities. However, with this technological revolution comes important ethical questions about originality, copyright, and intellectual property.

AI as a tool, not as a designer

Before delving into the ethical complexities, it's important to establish a fundamental premise that, as a designer, I dare to express: AI is a tool to drive creativity, not the final result of creative pieces. Just as a paintbrush doesn't create art on its own, AI tools require human vision, experience, and judgment to generate truly meaningful work.

The copyright dilemma

Whose are the original works?

One of the most complex debates revolves around the copyright of the works used to train AI models. Many of these tools have been trained on millions of existing images, illustrations, and designs, some of which may be protected by copyright.

Key considerations:

• The original artists did not explicitly consent to the use of their works in AI training.

• There is a legal loophole regarding compensation for original creators.

• The growing adoption of AI in design requires a reconsideration of current intellectual property laws. Designers who use AI in their creative process need clarity on the extent to which their creations can be protected and how to avoid potential infringements when using AI models trained with third-party data.

Who owns the rights to AI-generated content?

Currently, copyright laws for AI-generated content vary by country and continue to evolve. Some jurisdictions consider only humans to be authors, while others are adapting their legal frameworks.

The role of AI in the creation of original works

Let's imagine a designer uses an AI tool to generate a logo or design based on a set of input parameters. The AI, using its vast knowledge fueled by previously created data, generates a work that may appear completely new. Who is the author of that work? Is it the designer who provided the parameters, or the AI that processed the data and produced the final design?

The value of the human touch

As a designer I understand that true originality lies in:

• The initial conceptualization of the project.

• The selection and refinement of AI results.

• The strategic integration of content into the brand narrative.

• The cultural and contextual adaptation of the message.

Ethical best practices for the use of AI

1. Total transparency

• Disclose AI Use: Be transparent with customers about what tools were used.

• Document the process: Keep records of the creative process and human contributions.

  
  

2. Respect for intellectual property

• Check for originality: Use similarity detection tools to avoid inadvertent plagiarism.

• Respect unique styles: Avoid replicating the distinctive styles of specific artists without permission.

• Give credit where due: Acknowledge influences and references used.

  
  

3. Human added value

• Never deliver raw content: Always add creative and strategic human value.

• Personalization : Tailoring AI-generated content to specific customer needs.

• Quality Control: Review and refine all content before final delivery.

  
  

4. Continuing education

• Stay up-to-date: Follow legal and ethical developments in the field.

• Team training: Ensure all creatives understand the ethical implications.

• Participate in dialogue : Contribute to discussions on best practices in the industry

Ethical implications beyond the legal

The emergence of generative design using artificial intelligence has unleashed a flurry of questions that go far beyond legal disputes over copyright.

AI tools can generate a visually stunning work in seconds, from a simple text input.

This brings us to one of the most profound implications: the value of human creative work . Should we pay the same for an illustration or logo created in 10 minutes by an AI as for one that took an illustrator or designer 10 hours? The time, effort, skill, and track record of an artist or designer are elements that have always justified the value of their work.

AI is trained on millions of existing images, meaning its work is, by definition, a synthesis of everything that has already been created. The concept of a truly "original" work becomes more complex when anything can be generated from a universe of pre-existing data.

The true creative act could shift from execution to direction: a designer's ability to curate, refine, and guide AI toward a specific outcome.

The ethical future of design

The ethical dilemma of originality and intellectual property in AI design has no simple answers. However, as leaders in the creative industry, we have a responsibility to address these challenges with integrity and foresight.

The key is to remember that AI is a powerful tool that should be used to amplify human creativity, not replace it.

The dialogue on these issues is just beginning, and we are committed to being part of the solution. That's why I leave this final reflection so that together we can grow amidst the challenges that will be presented to us in this era:

Should we consider AI as a simple tool, similar to a paintbrush or a camera, in the hands of a designer? Or, given its ability to process massive amounts of information and generate new content , is AI a creative tool that needs to be subject to new, specific regulations?