Legal issues concerning 'art'ificial intelligence

Amongst all things that characterize human beings, creativity is perhaps the most distinguishable attribute that has for a long time separated the abilities of man and machine. The idea stems from the belief that creativity is sourced from emotions and experience that simply cannot be replicated through data systems. However, recent advancements in AI systems have challenged this notion. Machine systems are now also capable of creating unique artwork to an extent that they preferred over human created art. This has obviously challenged the existing legal systems on intellectual property rights and liability laws. This paper will therefore explore the legal issues concerning work created by AI and recommend key ideas that may be used in framing legislations for a near future that will be dominated by machine created work. The paper explores that manner in which creativity differs in art created by machines has compared to that created by AI. The paper then presents two main reasons that prevent application of IPR laws to machines (1) AI do not possess the need for economic incentive or the need for recognition , (2) AI cannot be held liable to copyright infringement as they there is no expected cost or expected benefit from AI breaking the law. The paper then explores the possibility of applying IPR on either of the three suggested parties: the investing company, the Programer and the end user