Artificial intelligence (AI) has become an increasingly used technology in today's society. In recent years, AI systems have even begun to be used to create creative works, so-called creative AI. This development gives rise to a number of different copyright challenges, especially if it is at all possible that such cultural objects can be protected by copyright. In light of the increased use of creative AI, the thesis aims to investigate the relationship between AI-generated cultural objects and copyright. To fulfill this purpose, three main questions are answered.   The first question that the thesis intends to answer is whether AI-generated works can be covered by copyright protection. The preconditions for protection are partly that the created cultural object must be covered by the concept of work, and partly must meet the requirement of originality, which is also considered to include a requirement of human creation. The inquiry takes support from EU law, among other things, which has clarified how these requirements are to be applied in a context where a technical aid is used.   The second issue of the thesis is aimed at such products that have been created by a more independent AI system and that should not be subject to copyright protection under the current system. Based on several different aspects, such as the motive and justification of copyright, it is investigated whether such cultural objects should also be covered by copyright. The thesis shows that there are things that speak both for and against an extended protection.   The design of a protection for AI-generated products is the work's third and final area of ​​investigation and is thus based on the premise that it is justified with an extended copyright protection. The study focuses on a number of different aspects that can be considered particularly relevant to discuss in the protection of AI-generated products, such as the time of protection and the subject of protection.   The thesis finds that it should be possible for AI-generated works to be covered by copyright, provided that there is room for a human being to make creative choices. Conversely, this should preclude that objects from more independent AI systems, which are becoming more common, should not be able to be protected by copyright. Such a conclusion also justifies a position regarding whether such works also should be covered by copyright. In order to promote investment, there may be reasons to extend protection, but it should be noted this can lead to human creatures becoming outcompeted. When designing the protection, this imbalance can be taken into account, for example by providing a shorter protection period. / Artificiell intelligens (AI) har börjat bli en alltmer använd teknik i dagens sam­hälle. På senare år har man till och med börjat använda AI-system för att skapa kreativa verk, så kallad kreativ AI. Denna utveckling ger upphov till en rad olika upphovsrättsliga utmaningar, särskilt om det överhuvudtaget är möjligt att sådana kulturföremål kan skyddas av upphovsrätten. Mot bakgrund av den ökade använd­ningen av kreativ AI syftar uppsatsen till att utreda förhållandet mellan AI-genererade kulturföremål och upphovsrätten. För att uppfylla detta syfte besvaras tre huvudsakliga frågeställningar. Den första frågan som undersökningen avser att besvara är huruvida AI-genererade verk kan omfattas av ett upphovsrättsligt skydd. Förutsättningarna för skydd är dels att det skapade kulturföremålet ska omfattas av verksbegreppet, dels att det ska uppfylla kravet på originalitet, vilket även anses innefatta ett krav på mänskligt skapande. Utredningen tar bland annat stöd i EU-rättslig praxis som har förtydligat hur dessa krav ska tillämpas i en kontext där ett tekniskt hjälpmedel används.     Undersökningens andra frågeställning tar sikte på sådana alster som skapats av mer självständiga AI-system och som inte torde kunna vara föremål för ett upphovs­rättsligt skydd enligt den nuvarande ordningen. Med avstamp i ett antal olika aspekter, såsom upphovsrättens motiv och rättfärdigande, utreds huruvida även sådana kulturföremål bör omfattas av upphovsrätten. Undersökningen visar på att det finns saker som talar såväl för som mot ett utvidgat skydd.   Utformningen av ett skydd för AI-genererade alster är arbetets tredje och sista undersökningsområde och bygger alltså på förutsättningen att det är motiverat med ett utvidgat upphovsrättsligt skydd. Undersökningen fokuserar på en rad olika aspekter som kan anses vara särskilt relevanta att diskutera vid ett skydd för AI-genererade alster, såsom skyddstiden och skyddssubjektet.   Förevarande undersökning konstaterar att det torde vara möjligt för AI-genererade verk att omfattas av upphovsrätten under förutsättningen att det finns utrymme för en människa att ta kreativa val. Motsatsvis torde detta utesluta att föremål från mer självständiga AI-system, som börjar bli allt vanligare, inte bör kunna skyddas upp­hovsrättsligt. En sådan slutsats motiverar även ett ställningstagande huruvida även sådana alster bör omfattas av upphovsrätten. För att främja investeringar kan det finnas skäl att utvidga skyddet, men hänsyn bör tas till att det kan leda till att mänskliga kreatörer kan konkurreras ut. Vid utformningen av skyddet skulle man kunna ta hänsyn till denna obalans, exempelvis genom att ge en kortare skyddstid.

In the age of digitalization several new ways of creating immaterial property have sprung up due to the resurgence of artificial intelligence (AI). This has paved the way for different kinds of tech including the assistance of AI in a more normalized way. A prominent variation of this tech is called "deepfake". Deepfakes are a technology that essentially places your face, likeness, mannerisms, and voice onto new situations that the creator then steers to make the deepfake do or say things that the person whose deepfake is based on hasn't done or said. This technology has been used in a myriad of ways all from humourous content to extorsion and revenge porn. The aim of this master thesis is to analyse how immaterial law protection is achieved through current Swedish immaterial law principles and how these fit within the context of heavily based AI-tech such as deepfakes. This is done through a dogmatic lens meaning that a systematization and mapping of both Swedish and EU based laws and praxis are done as well as discussing the current thoughts on AI-assistance throughout the creative process. Another subject that is touched upon is the parody exception in immaterial law and the concept of adaptation and how these work with and apply to AI-based creations. Part of the problems that we face right now is that we have no existing legal parameters to solve the problem of larger AI-involvement in creative processes, this is certainly going to change how we view copyright law today. When comparing and using EU as well as Swedish praxis to analyze the AI-problem a common denominator is that all copyright law and praxis is based around the presumption that there needs to be a human involved in the majority of the creative process. AI already exists as a part of many creative processes today without any questions asked, however when the AI-part is more significant in the process the question becomes complicated when paired with traditional copyright law perspectives. Howevwer, some discussions have been going on in both Swedish and EU legal spheres, mostly in the EU who are going to legislate more in the field of AI. In Sweden there have been no legislative processes when it comes to AI in copyright law however there have been some governmental organisations and essays that have shed a light on the matter. I conclude this master thesis by writing about the findings of each question as has been mentioned above, namely that AI becomes a significant factor in deciding if a deepfake achieves copyright protection or not and the same can be said about parodies. After this I make a concluding analysis of the urgency of a need for laws that tackle AI in the area of immaterial laws listing other areas that might need it more than immaterial laws as has been explored throughout this thesis as well and that Sweden need to take part in every discussion about this to form a sustainable legal framework for AIs in the context of immaterial laws. This will open up for a clear framework when assessing different technologies that use AI like deepfakes as well.

In the age of digitalizarion several new ways of creating immaterial property have sprung up due to the resurgence of artificial intelligence (AI). This has paved the way for different kinds of tech including the assistance of AI in a more normalized way. A prominent variation of this tech is called "deepfake". Deepfakes are a technology that essentially places your face, likeness, mannerisms, and voice onto new situations that the creator then steers to make the deepfake do or say things that the person whose deepfake is based on hasn't done or said. This technology has been used in a myriad of ways, all from humourous content to extorsion and revenge porn. The aim of this master thesis is to analyse how immaterial law protection is achieved through current Swedish immaterial law principles and how these fit within the context of heavily based AI-tech such as deepfakes. This is done through a dogmatic lens, meaning that a systematization and mapping of both Swedish and EU-based laws and praxis are done as well as discussing the current thoughts on AI-assistance throughout the creative process. Another subject that is touched upon is the parody exception in immaterial law and the concept of adaptation and how these work with and apply to AI-based creations. Part of the problems that we face right now is that we have no existing legal parameters to solve the problem of larger AI-involvement in creative processes, this is certainly going to change how we view copyright law today. When comparing and using EU as well as Swedish praxis to analyze the AI-problem a common denominator is that all copyright law and praxis is based around the presumption that there needs to be a human involved in the majority of the creative process. AI already exists as a part of many creative processes today without any questions asked, however when the AI-part is more significant in the process the question becomes complicated when paired with traditional copyright law perspectives. However, some discussions have been going on in both Swedish and EU legal spheres, mostly in the EU who are going to legislate more in the field of AI. In Sweden there have been no legislative processes when it comes to AI in copyright law however there have been some governmental organisations and essays that have shed a light on the matter. I conclude this master thesis by writing about the findings of each question as has been mentioned above, namely that AI becomes a significant factor in deciding if a deepfake achieves copyright protection or not and the same can be said about parodies. After this I make a concluding analysis of the urgency of a need for laws that tackle AI in the area of immaterial laws listing other areas that might need it more than immaterial laws as has been explored throughout this thesis as well and that Sweden needs to take part in every discussion about this to form a sustainable legal framework for AIs in the context of immaterial laws. This will open up for a clear framework when assessing different technologies that use AI like deepfakes as well.