With respect to ownership, if AI- studio or potentially third party tools generated content is considered integrated into a game via an API. a ‘computer-generated’ work Insofar as copyright in any resulting (which may depend on the extent generated outputs vests in the player, of AI versus human input involved), including in the player’s prompts, the author is considered to be the securing transfer of ownership of ‘person by whom the arrangements player copyright to the studio may necessary for the creation of the be achieved under contract (eg the work are undertaken’. This may relevant EULA or other terms of use). be the individual that inputs the However, there remains the question relevant prompts, or it may be the (discussed earlier) as to whether the AI provider – the point is currently generated outputs are eligible for untested. Where third party AI tools copyright protection in the first place. are involved, the issue of ownership If players cause infringing AI- of generated outputs should be generated content to appear in addressed in the contract between online games, the publisher may the game studio and the AI provider. be liable for making that content Game players’ contributions are available to the public, but may expected to be the most significant also be able to claim the benefit advancement of the game industry of the hosting exception if it acts enabled by generative AI. Within this expeditiously to remove any framework, gamers are most likely to infringing content it becomes use AI tools provided by the game aware of. 156