Who Is the Author of a Work Created with Artificial Intelligence?

One of the major debates sparked by artificial intelligence in the art world centers on a seemingly simple question: who is the author of a work created with AI?

When an artist writes a prompt for a generative tool and receives a finished image, the creative process appears to be split between different agents. There is the artist, who conceived the idea and formulated the instructions, and there is the system, which interprets that information and produces a result based on its models and data.

This situation challenges the traditional concept of authorship. For centuries, the artist was directly linked to the act of creation—painting, drawing, sculpting, or photographing. With generative AI, however, part of the execution can be carried out by a machine. Recent research points to a shift in authorship, moving from the mere act of "making" to activities such as selection, curation, process design, and decision-making.

This does not mean that any image produced by artificial intelligence is automatically a work of art. Context, intention, and the choices involved in the process remain crucial to its interpretation.

The issue also extends beyond aesthetics into the realm of copyright law. Who should be recognized when a work relies simultaneously on a technological system, the data used for training, and an artist's decisions?

Perhaps AI-generated art is compelling us to move away from a rigid definition of authorship. Instead of simply asking, "Who created this image?" we might begin to ask, "Who conceived, directed, selected, and gave meaning to this process?"

In this sense, artificial intelligence does more than just produce new images; it is driving a profound transformation in the very definitions of artist, creation, and authorship.

Latamarte