Kateryna Militsyna


Immaterialgüter- und Wettbewerbsrecht



Innovation, Zukunftstechnologien, Immaterialgüterrecht mit Schwerpunkt auf KI-Themen

Wissenschaftlicher Werdegang

Seit 10/2022
Doktorandin, Abteilung Immaterialgüter und Wettbewerbsrecht
Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb

Seit 2019
Nationale Taras-Shevchenko-Universität Kyiw

2017 – 2019
Master-Abschluss mit Auszeichnung, Internationales Recht
Nationale Taras-Shevchenko-Universität Kyiw

2013 – 2019
Bachelor-Abschluss mit Auszeichnung, Internationales Recht
Nationale Taras-Shevchenko-Universität Kyiw


Beiträge in Sammelwerken, Kommentierungen, Handbüchern und Lexika

Legal Framework for Output Based on Artificial Intelligence: Ukraine's Place on the Global Search Path, in: Heiko Richter (Hg.), Competition and Intellectual Property Law in Ukraine (MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 31), Springer, Berlin; Heidelberg 2023, 559 - 582. DOI

  • This chapter outlines the Ukrainian discussion on providing a legal framework for output based on artificial intelligence (AI) with a view to identifying its place and embedding it in the global debate. To this end, the author briefly sets out a common theoretical basis together with practical insights of copyrightability requirements under Ukrainian copyright law and then proceeds to examine output based on AI against them. This assessment reveals the particularities of scholarly approaches to treating such output in Ukraine and other jurisdictions. While the threshold of human involvement sufficient for a work to obtain copyright protection is yet to be clarified, the Ukrainian academic sector generally considers that Ukrainian copyright law does not protect a considerable part of output based on AI. Further, the more sophisticated AI systems in creative industries will become, the more output based on AI will be non-copyrightable. Under these circumstances, Ukrainian scholarly circles have actively embarked on a search for a legal framework for such output. The chapter offers an overview of ideas put forward in this regard and puts them in an international context. Particular attention is paid to the initiative on introducing a new sui generis right for non-original computer-generated objects as the only proposal that has so far made its way to the legislative initiative level. By shedding light on the Ukrainian ideas, the chapter shows the way for future considerations and perspectives.


Human Creative Contribution to AI-Based Output – One Just Can(’t) Get Enough, GRUR Int 72, 10 (2023), 939 - 949. DOI

  • The article attempts to clarify the issue of the copyrightability of AI-based output by streamlining the assessment of human creative contribution to the creation process assisted by generative AI systems. It starts with briefly outlining the state of the art of modern generative AI systems contributing to a better understanding of AI. Then the article presents a five-part test to distinguish between sufficient and insufficient human creative participation and contemplates the following authorship scenarios: sole authorship of AI designers or users; their joint authorship; and non-authorship. The article proceeds with applying the test to output produced using Midjourney, a generative AI tool. It concludes that in many cases of using AI to create output human creative participation remains sufficient for copyright protection eligibility. However, there are also developments and circumstances that drive the increase in ‘authorless’ AI-based output. Moreover, depending on the specific circumstances, using even the same AI system may lead to different test results.

Перспективи Об’єктів, Створених на Основі Штучного Інтелекту, з Позиції Авторського Права Китайської Народної Республіки (Prospects of Output Based on Artificial Intelligence in Terms of Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China), Актуальні Проблеми Держави і Права (Current Problems of State and Law) 95 (2022), 27 - 34.

  • The article attempts to identify prospects of output based on artificial intelligence in terms of copyright law of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). To achieve this goal, it outlines the key historical factors that have influenced the modern copyright law of the PRC as well as analyses the relevant case law and amendments introduced in the Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China as a result of the copyright reform of 2020.
  • https://doi.org/10.32782/apdp.v95.2022.4

Еволюція Критерію Оригінальності в Авторському Праві України, Актуальні Проблеми Держави і Права 96 (2022), 56 - 62.

  • The article attempts to explore the evolution of the criterion of originality in Ukrainian copyright law. To achieve this goal, it outlines the historical background. The article proceeds by examining the criterion of originality in current Ukrainian copyright law. For this purpose, it analyses legislation, judicial practice and doctrinal sources.
  • https://doi.org/10.32782/apdp.v96.2022.6

Legal Personhood for Artificial Intelligence: Pro, Contra, Abstain?, Teisė 122 (2022), 150 - 158. DOI

  • This article is about the legal personhood of artificial intelligence as one of the existing options of regulating AI and coping with the challenges arising out of its functioning. It begins with the search for the definition of AI and goes on to consider the arguments against the legal personhood of AI, the options of such a legal personhood, and the factors taken into account in devising the legal personhood of AI. The article ends with our vision of the legal personhood of AI.

Andere Veröffentlichungen, Presseartikel, Interviews

New Ukrainian Law on Copyright and Related Rights, The IPKat 2023 (gemeinsam mit Liubov Maidanyk).

Stipendien, wissenschaftliche Preise und Ehrungen

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb