| Abstrakt: |
Like many courts across the country in 2023, courts in the Eleventh Circuit were met with novel claims challenging ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence tools. These cases raise common questions: How should courts treat the speech of machines? When a machine generates allegedly defamatory material, who is the speaker--mortal or machine? When a machine generates expressive creations, who is the artist, and does that shape copyright eligibility? When a machine makes assertions about reality through lab analyses and other forensic reports, who is the accuser, and how does the answer impact a defendant's rights at trial? Should those answers stem from a common doctrinal model for machine speech attribution, or should they be discordant based on competing policy goals in each area of law ? This Article explores those cases and the increasingly expansive machine speech doctrine, including Walters v. OpenAI, a 2023 Georgia defamation case involving ChatGPT, and a series of cases arising from the Eleventh Circuit's machine speech Confrontation Clause case--one of the first major cases of its kind--United States v. Lamons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
