Legal Risks and Opportunities of Using Artificial Intelligence in Web Development: Issues of Intellectual Property and Liability
Keywords:
Artificial intelligence, intellectual property, liability, web development, UzbekistanAbstract
This article examines the legal aspects of artificial intelligence (AI) use in web development from intellectual property and liability perspectives within Uzbekistan's legal framework. The author analyzes current national legislation, including the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights," Civil Code, and Law "On Electronic Commerce," identifying significant gaps in AI technology regulation. The research reveals that Uzbekistan's legislation, like most international legal systems, does not grant copyright protection to content created solely by AI without substantial human creative contribution. This creates legal uncertainty for developers using AI to generate web content. A comparative analysis with international approaches (EU, US) and recommendations from international organizations (WIPO, OECD) identifies opportunities for legal reform. The study shows that under current Uzbek law, liability for AI-generated content likely falls on human developers or service providers, potentially exposing them to unforeseen legal risks, particularly as AI "safe harbor" provisions for online intermediaries may not apply to AI-generated content. The article proposes several recommendations: clarifying the IP status of AI-assisted works while maintaining the human-centric approach to copyright; introducing exceptions for text and data mining for AI training; strengthening the liability framework for AI deployments with clear rules on responsibility allocation; updating e-commerce laws to address AI-generated content; building judicial capacity through guidelines and training; and pursuing international cooperation to harmonize Uzbekistan's approach with global best practices. These measures would help Uzbekistan navigate the legal challenges of AI while fostering innovation and protecting rights holders in the digital economy.
References
Academic Literature:
Kasap, A. (2020). Copyright and Creative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Systems: A Twenty-First Century Approach to Authorship of AI-Generated Works. Harvard Law Review, 133(3), 894-917. (Note: analysis of authorship criteria in the age of AI).
Dornis, T. W. (2017). Artificial Creativity: Emergent Works and the Void in Current Copyright Law. Journal of Internet Law, 21(1), 12-25. (Exploring the challenge of AI-generated content under current copyright doctrines).
Mayana, R. F., et al. (2024). Legal Issues of Artificial Intelligence–Generated Works: Challenges on Indonesian Copyright Law. Law Reform, 20(1), 54-75. (Comparative perspective on AI and copyright in a civil law jurisdiction).
Grimmelmann, J., & Perzanowski, A. (2022). AI and the Copyright Cold War. Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts, 45(3), 343-369. (Discussing U.S. and Chinese approaches to AI and intellectual property).
Abbott, R. (2020). I Think, Therefore I Invent: Creative Computers and Their Impact on Intellectual Property Law. Boston College Law Review, 61(6), 1933-1970. (Argues for recognizing AI’s role in invention and proposes legal reforms).
Eshonkulov J. (2025). The Role of Smart Contracts in Civil Law and Issues of Legal Regulation. Uzbek Journal of Law and Digital Policy, 3(1), 104–111. https://doi.org/10.59022/ujldp.294
Eshonkulov, J. (2024). Legal foundations for the application of artificial intelligence Technologies in the Sports Industry. American Journal of Education and Evaluation Studies, 1(7), 240-247. https://semantjournals.org/index.php/AJEES/article/view/320/287
International Legal Instruments and Reports:
OECD. (2019). Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence. OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0449. (Contains the OECD AI Principles promoting human rights, transparency, and accountability in AI) (AI Principles Overview - OECD.AI).
OECD. (2024). Updated OECD AI Principles. (Revised recommendations incorporating new developments in AI governance) (AI Principles Overview - OECD.AI).
WIPO. (2020). WIPO Revised Issues Paper on Intellectual Property Policy and Artificial Intelligence.
WIPO Conversation on IP and AI, Second Session. (Identifies key IP issues: inventorship, authorship, data mining, infringement, liability in IP context).
European Commission. (2019). Directive (EU) 2019/790 on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. (Articles 3 and 4 introduce text and data mining exceptions relevant for AI training data).
European Commission. (2022). Proposal for an AI Liability Directive COM(2022)496 and Proposal to adapt product liability rules COM(2022)495. (Draft EU instruments to facilitate redress for damage caused by AI, extending producer liability).
European Parliament. (2023). Draft EU Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) (common position text). (Comprehensive framework for AI, including Art. 28b on generative AI obligations) (AI vs. Copyright: Navigating the Legal Maze of Generative AI Content Creation – Uzbekistan Law Blog).
Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Paris Act 1971). (International treaty underlying copyright law; implicitly requires a human author for protected works).
TRIPS Agreement (1994), Art. 10. (Covers computer programs as literary works but does not address AI authorship explicitly). UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. (Sets out ethical principles for AI, including accountability and transparency, which influence legal approaches).
OECD. (2023). The State of Implementation of the OECD AI Principles: Insights from National AI Policies. (Report surveying how countries integrate OECD principles into law).
National Legal Acts of Uzbekistan:
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On Copyright and Related Rights” (No. ZRU-42, 20 July 2006, as amended up to 2021). (Primary copyright law defining protected works and authorship) (Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. LRU-42 of July 20, 2006, on Copyright and Related Rights).
Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan (1995, as amended). (General civil law provisions on obligations and liability, including Article 985 on compensation for harm) (My5 v. AIMC&CRA: available private and public law remedies – Uzbekistan Law Blog).
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On Informatization” (No. 560-II, 11 Dec 2003). (Framework law on information, likely relevant to online content and responsibilities).
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On Electronic Commerce” (No. ZRU-792, 29 Sept 2022). (Governs e-commerce, including definitions of intermediaries and their obligations; new edition updating the 2015 law) (INTA Intermediary Liability and Takedown Policies in Asia).
Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 185 (2 June 2016) “On Approval of the Rules of E-Commerce”. (Contains detailed rules, e.g., Paragraph 19, stating intermediaries are not obliged to monitor information) (INTA Intermediary Liability and Takedown Policies in Asia).
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On Guarantees and Freedom of Access to Information” (1997, as amended). (Affirms principles of information access and may intersect with internet content regulation).
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On Personal Data” (No. ZRU-547, 2019). (Though focused on privacy, relevant when AI in web development processes user data).
Criminal Code of Uzbekistan (1994, as amended), Article 149(1). (Criminal liability for copyright infringement, which could theoretically apply if AI use leads to large-scale infringement) (INTA Intermediary Liability and Takedown Policies in Asia).
Presidential Decree “On the Development of Artificial Intelligence in Uzbekistan” (if any official policy document, e.g., 2021 decree establishing an AI development roadmap). (Sets policy direction, emphasizing need for legal support of AI).
Informational Resources:
Uzbekistan Law Blog – Bakhtiyorova, F. (30 June 2024). “AI vs. Copyright: Navigating the Legal Maze of Generative AI Content Creation”. (AI vs. Copyright: Navigating the Legal Maze of Generative AI Content Creation – Uzbekistan Law Blog) (AI vs. Copyright: Navigating the Legal Maze of Generative AI Content Creation – Uzbekistan Law Blog) (AI vs. Copyright: Navigating the Legal Maze of Generative AI Content Creation – Uzbekistan Law Blog) (Analysis of Uzbek copyright law’s stance on AI-generated works and recommendations for reform).
Uzbekistan Law Blog – (2023). Discussion of Civil Code Article 985 and liability in media context (My5 case) (My5 v. AIMC&CRA: available private and public law remedies – Uzbekistan Law Blog). (Blog post illustrating how Uzbek civil law handles damages and how that might apply to tech scenarios).
Ballard Spahr LLP. (2024). “Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss AI Defamation Suit”. (Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss AI Defamation Suit | Alerts and Articles | Insights | Ballard Spahr)(Legal alert describing a U.S. case against OpenAI, implications for publisher liability of AI – a trend relevant internationally).
Reed Smith LLP. (2022). “Sorry, DABUS. AI cannot be an inventor on a U.S. Patent.” (Sorry, DABUS. AI cannot be an inventor on a U.S. Patent | Perspectives | Reed Smith LLP) (Sorry, DABUS. AI cannot be an inventor on a U.S. Patent | Perspectives | Reed Smith LLP) (Client alert summarizing the U.S. Federal Circuit’s ruling that AI cannot be listed as an inventor, underscoring the human requirement in patent law).
EU Reporter. (1 Sept 2022). “Is internet content still restricted in Uzbekistan?” (Is internet content still restricted in Uzbekistan? - EU Reporter) (Article discussing Uzbekistan’s internet regulation models, mentions that Uzbek law follows a model that can release ISPs from liability under certain conditions).
RAND Corporation. (2023). “Artificial Intelligence Impacts on Copyright Law” (Perspective Report) (Artificial Intelligence Impacts on Copyright Law | RAND) (Artificial Intelligence Impacts on Copyright Law | RAND). (Overview of how AI challenges copyright, noting U.S. and EU practices and scholarly views, useful for comparative insight).
IPWatchdog. (2024). “Amid Approval of EU AI Act, Creators Demand Stronger Protections for Rightsholders”. (Online article reporting on debates around the EU AI Act’s IP provisions, reflecting concerns of content creators).
Mashable. (8 June 2023). Report on first defamation lawsuit against OpenAI. (News piece referenced in the law review article about the Georgia case, illustrating real-world incidents of AI causing legal harm).
Kluwer Copyright Blog. (2018). “Monkey Selfie case finally settled”. (Blog explaining the outcome of the Naruto v. Slater case – useful as analogy that non-humans (animals or AI) can’t own copyright).
Official website of the Ministry of Justice of Uzbekistan – Lex.uz. (Accessed 2025). (Source for official texts of laws such as the Copyright Law and E-Commerce Law in Uzbek/Russian with unofficial English translations) (INTA Intermediary Liability and Takedown Policies in Asia).
