Who is the author? A legal and normative view of authorship in Generative AI-aided academic works
David M. Pereira

TL;DR
This paper analyzes how European legal and normative frameworks interpret authorship in AI-assisted academic work, proposing a qualitative threshold model to distinguish legitimate AI support from authorship undermining practices.
Contribution
It introduces a novel qualitative threshold framework based on European law to assess authorship legitimacy in AI-aided academic work.
Findings
Authorship is a qualitative threshold, not binary, under European law.
GenAI support remains legitimate if under human intellectual control.
Displacement of creative autonomy by AI raises authorship disputes.
Abstract
The widespread adoption of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools in higher education has fundamentally altered the conditions under which academic work is produced, challenging long-standing assumptions about authorship, responsibility, and learning. While much of the existing literature has focused on technical, ethical, or pedagogical implications of GenAI, comparatively little attention has been paid to the legal and normative aspects of authorship in AI-aided academic work. In this work, we examine how the use of GenAI intersects with the concept of authorship as understood within European regulatory and institutional frameworks. Drawing primarily on European copyright law, notably the requirement of human intellectual creation, the paper argues that authorship functions as a qualitative threshold rather than a binary attribute. Authorship may remain attributable to the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
