Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1534549
7 FEATURE maltatoday | SUNDAY • 20 APRIL 2025 heaven, or hurdle for creativity? volidis and Galea that the de- bate presents a conundrum. "While the legal concept of 'fair use' has traditionally act- ed as a flexible framework to balance innovation and creator rights, the sheer scale and na- ture of generative AI shift the dynamics entirely," Dingli said. "When models ingest millions, sometimes billions, of creative works from the internet, in- cluding highly expressive con- tent such as visual art, and use them to produce outputs that directly mimic or even replace the original, the ethical lines begin to blur." Maria Galea also argued that while AI can replicate styles, it lacks the emotion, the context, and intention that comes from human creators. "There is a profound distinc- tion between inspiration and automation. Art integrates into the shared cultural landscape by assuming its own identity through inspiration and emo- tion, deeply rooted in human experience and emotion. When using tools like ChatGPT, by typing in prompts you are es- sentially providing directions to a system that mimics pat- terns. Art, on the other hand, is not predetermined; it is a unique form that transcends mere technicality," she said. Will legal protection safe guard art? At the end of the day, while operating within a globalised community, artists can only seek refuge in the law. Ioanis Revolidis said posting something online does not re- linquish art ownership. "Because someone posted something online, it does not mean one is given the licence to make that art their own, and even more so gain profits from it. You lose control from a practical point of view, but you do not lose control from a legal standpoint. The owner has to give permission," he said. "On- ly the artists should decide the amount of copies being made." Alexiei Dingli said there is a need for new regulation, but one which is "thoughtful and adaptable". "The systems we currently rely on were never intended for this scale or complexity. Laws designed for print media or broadcast cannot adequate- ly address the peculiarities of algorithmic training, digital mimicry, or the rights of cre- ators in a world of generative content. At the same time, we must be careful not to overreg- ulate in a way that stifles genu- ine innovation. The goal is not to hinder progress, but to guide it with a steady hand," he said. Galea shared the sentiment on the need for legal regulation, saying governments should create frameworks which pro- tect jobs, and ensure human creativity remains central in an AI-driven world. "This rais- es a critical question: How can policymakers ensure that reg- ulations keep pace with rapid technological advancements while fostering a fair and thriv- ing creative ecosystem?" On the other hand, Revolid- is believes Europe, and in turn Malta, operates within one of the most prepared jurisdictions in the world. The EU has introduced new rules to help manage how arti- ficial intelligence uses art and other creative works. Through a law called Directive (EU) 2021/790, the EU allows re- searchers and companies to use digital content for training AI, as long as they respect copy- right. This means that AI can ana- lyse large amounts of data, like books or images, to learn – but artists and creators still have the right to say no if they don't want their work used. The goal is to support new technology while also protecting creative rights. "Obviusly law is a process, and we are not at the finishline yet," he said. A quick solution to a fast- paced problem Until a secure and lasting legal framework is achieved, artists can seek quick solutions in pro- tecting their art. "Watermarking and metada- ta can certainly help with at- tribution, and they may serve as useful tools in specific cas- es, but they're far from perfect solutions. Watermarks, for ex- ample, can be easily removed – often with the very same AI tools we're trying to regulate," Dingli said. Metadata, he said, is notori- ously fragile, disappearing the moment a file is uploaded to most social platforms or con- verted into a different format. "These technologies offer partial assistance in tracking provenance, but they fall short when it comes to proving in- fringement, especially when AI outputs are not identical repro- ductions but stylistic echoes," he said. Dingli said the deeper issue lies in the fact that many of these tools were never designed for the challenges AI presents today. "What we need is not just better tracking, but a re- thinking of how consent, prov- enance, and compensation are handled in a world where al- gorithms can consume vast li- braries of human expression in a matter of hours." It remains to be seen whether the AI age will bring about an artistic renaissance, or stifle the creative spirit. What is certain is that as generations have done before them, artists need to adapt to the new realities they face.