The dissertation is the first academic work in Ukrainian civil law which comprehensively examines the theoretical and practical aspects of the legal regime of architectural works created with the use of artificial intelligence under the laws of Ukraine and foreign countries, defines the essence of the legal relations outlined, studies their subject composition and the specifics of the mechanism for protecting the rights of their participants.
The research analyzes the structure and dynamics of legal relations the object of which is an architectural work created with the use of artificial intelligence, and as its theoretical basis the author investigates the issues of civilistic characteristics of the categories of legal regime of the object and legal status of the subject of civil legal relations, including copyright relations, and identifies their common and distinctive features. The author emphasizes that the category of legal regime of the object of civil legal relations primarily indicates the limits and restrictions in its legal regulation, i.e., the imperative elements in the general dispositive regulation of civil relations. The category of legal status is applied to the subjects of legal relations, and its basis in civil law is the legal subjectivity of a person. However, the common feature of the categories of legal status and legal regime is the focus of legal regulation on relations in the area of interaction of subjects with the corresponding legal status with regard to objects with a certain legal regime. Considering these provisions, the author confirms the conclusion that artificial intelligence is exceptionally an object and, accordingly, that it cannot be recognized as a subject of legal relations at the present time and be granted any legal status.
The study proves that an architectural work created with the use of artificial intelligence always contains a significant intellectual and creative contribution of the architect as its author, and therefore is always original, i.e. a work for which copyright, rather than sui generis rights, arise accordingly. The author of such a work is always an architect who has used an artificial intelligence system on a legitimate legal basis or has used the result of the legitimate use of an artificial intelligence system by the customer of the work under a relevant agreement. It is stated that even if generative artificial intelligence is used, the architect, as a qualified specialist, provides, first of all, a significant necessary and sufficient number of requests and hints which correct and direct the process of generation by artificial intelligence, ultimately determining its final form and originality as an object of civil legal protection. In addition, the architect's significant intellectual and creative contribution to the creation of an The author concludes that there are specific features of the legal nature of author's supervision in the field of architecture which is carried out during the creation of an architectural work, the final stage of which is the construction of an architectural object as a form of embodiment of such a work, with due regard for its place in the system of relevant legal relations. The author substantiates the dual legal nature of author's supervision as an element of legal relations, namely, its characterization as right-duty – both the right and the duty of an architect as the author of an architectural work, since author's supervision contains signs of both possible and necessary behavior of a subject of legal relations. Author's supervision is necessary to ensure control over compliance with building codes and regulations in the field of architectural activity, i.e. its essence goes beyond the possible behavior of an architect as an authorized entity, as it is also mandatory. At the same time, the right to the inviolability of an architectural work is realized through the author's supervision; during the author's supervision, the architect also has the right to object to non-compliance with the project, and he or she cannot be forced to exercise this right unless it concerns compliance with the legally established standards in construction, and is obliged to take measures in case of deviation from the project using artificial intelligence should always be considered the exercise of author's supervision, which is an integral part of architectural activity, during which an architectural object is erected as a form of embodiment of an architectural work, and determines the status of the architect as a special subject of responsibility for the result of the embodiment of this work. In this case, the artificial intelligence system is a tool for creating a work, and not a source of generating a non-original object to which sui generis rights arise.
