AI 프롬프트의 저작권 보호 가능성에 관한 소고

This paper examines the legal nature of prompts and the possibility of copyright protection in a creative environment that is changing due to the rapid spread of generative AI. Prompts go beyond simple command input and reflect the creator’s planning intention and emotion, and function as creative acts that have a substantial impact on the subject, composition, and style of the generated results. Accordingly, the need to reinterpret the concept of ‘creativity’ under the existing copyright law and shift from a judgment centered on results to a ‘process-centered’ or ‘contribution-centered’ evaluation method that reflects the creative process or human contribution is being raised. In relation to this, this paper focuses on the possibility that prompts can be protected as joint works or edited works, and examines whether prompt input can be recognized as a substantial creative contribution beyond simple machine operation. Through this, in addition to the reestablishment of criteria for judging creativity, a discussion is conducted on whether the prompt writer can be recognized as an ‘author’ under the copyright law. In addition, it analyzed whether prompts can be protected as computer program works or databases, and pointed out that general prompts have technical and structural limitations as non-deterministic instructions based on natural language, making it difficult to meet the protection requirements of the current copyright law. However, in the case of recently emerged complex prompts, it was suggested that they have a logical structure and repeatability, and thus may be re-evaluated as edited works or databases in the future as technological developments advance. In addition, regarding legislative measures for prompt protection, it was suggested that expanding the definition provisions and types of works in the existing copyright law rather than establishing a separate independent law could be a more stable and realistic alternative. To this end, it was emphasized that a multi-layered system design should be established to introduce concepts such as ‘prompt-based works’ and ‘AI directors’ and supplement the criteria for judging creativity. It is reasonable to evaluate AI prompts as a new form of creative medium that reflects human creative planning and expressive intent, and as an independent creative act that can be protected under the copyright law. Therefore, legal evaluation and institutional acceptance of prompts will be key tasks for protecting the rights of creators and securing legal stability in the creative ecosystem of the generative AI era.