Artificial Intelligence and Digital Watermarking will Transform Copyright Arbitration and Dispute Resolution for 3D Printing: An Empirical Analysis

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been the subject of much discussion in terms of its applicability to law. This paper focuses on the use of AI in copyright arbitration and dispute resolution for three-dimenisonal (3D) printing. Its main argument is that laws relating to digital watermarking will push the utilisation of AI in such alternative dispute resolution methods, be it arbitration or mediation, in a particular direction, i.e., one that favours more complex watermarking and the use of AI in automatically resolving disputes, through alternative dispute resolution methods, i.e. arbitration and/or mediation. In order to make this argument, our article follows the below structure: first we focus our discussion on the existing laws relating to digital watermarks – making the point that the more complex the watermark placed in content, the more likely it is to obtain protection. Furthermore, due to the fact that even AI systems themselves may fall under the purview of such protection, hence, as part of this paper, we then undertook funded empirical work to apply an existing AI system to copyright case law, to see how an AI system can read and understand cases and produce outcomes in disputes concerning 3D printing. The result of this was that it is clear that more complex watermarks will lead to faster and more accurate resolutions. Following that , we then consider the existing legal regime for dispute resolution, through alternative dispute resolution methods (be it arbitration and/or mediation), and make the contention that AI systems can fit within the existing legal framework. However, we have concluded that certain issues are raised which we feel should merit closer attention. For example, there should be more explicit consideration in law of how watermarking can influence the direction of AI dispute resolution, through alternative dispute resolution methods and that the role of the judge in such AI dispute resolution methods needs to be considered further.