OpenAI's GPT-4 is a Large Language Model (LLM) that can generate coherent constructed languages, or "conlangs," which we propose be called "genlangs" when generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI). The genlangs created by ChatGPT for this research (Voxphera, Vivenzia, and Lumivoxa) each have unique features, appear facially coherent, and plausibly “translate”...
The emergence of generative Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) is putting computers at odds with creators and raising novel questions about the future of Intellectual Property (“IP”) law. Though scholars are scrambling to anticipate the legal consequences of AI, few have attempted to describe how prevailing tech-philosophies might shape AI regulation via...
OpenAI's GPT-4 is a Large Language Model (LLM) that can generate coherent constructed languages, or "conlangs," which we propose be called "genlangs" when generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI). The genlangs created by ChatGPT for this research (Voxphera, Vivenzia, and Lumivoxa) each have unique features, appear facially coherent, and plausibly “translate” into English.
This study investigates whether genlangs created by ChatGPT follow Zipf's law. Zipf’s law approximately holds across all natural and artificially constructed human languages. According to Zipf’s law, the word frequencies in a text corpus are inversely proportional to their rank in the frequency table. This means that the most frequent word appears about twice as often as the second most frequent... (read more)
The emergence of generative Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) is putting computers at odds with creators and raising novel questions about the future of Intellectual Property (“IP”) law. Though scholars are scrambling to anticipate the legal consequences of AI, few have attempted to describe how prevailing tech-philosophies might shape AI regulation via persuasion and/or regulatory capture.
In this paper, I describe one such “techno-optimist” perspective and consider its idealized application to the thorniest issues of AI in IP. In short, how would a legal system influenced by techno-optimism treat issues of copyright and patent law in a world of rapidly accelerating AI? After examining (1) text & data mining (“TDM”) regulations, (2) copyright infringement by AI models, and (3) the patent system & patentability of AI generated innovations, I conclude that a techno-optimist approach to IP law would necessitate diminished data & copyright protections, but have indeterminate if not paradoxical implications for the patent system.