Artificial Intelligence's Legal Shadow: Global Regulatory Battles Over Intellectual Property and Content Liability

This research paper investigates the profound legal disruptions caused by Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) across Intellectual Property (IP) rights and civil liability frameworks. GAI, encompassing large language models (LLMs) and specialised generators, presents unprecedented challenges to the human-centric foundations of copyright(authorship and originality) and patent law(inventorship), necessitating doctrinal adaptation and legislative intervention.[1] Critically, the Supreme Court’s decision in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Lynn Goldsmith, Inc.[2] Sharpens the commercial nexus in fair use analysis, significantly raising infringement risks for GAI outputs, particularly those competing in established creative markets. Concurrently, the opacity and functional autonomy of GAI create a substantial liability gap, prompting novel regulatory approaches such as the European Union’s proposed Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive (AILD)[3] This analysis offers a comparative global perspective on evolving legal responses and proposes systemic reforms, including statutory collective licensing for training data and enhanced transparency mandates, designed to balance technological innovation with creator compensation and legal accountability.[4]