Post-Human Creativity And The Evaluation Of Intellectual Property Justifications: A Sustainable Development Perspective

Abstract

In the age of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI), the foundational justifications for intellectual property (IP) are being strained by the rise of non-human creative agents. Historically grounded in philosophical traditions emphasizing labor, personhood, and social utility, IP law presumes human intention and moral desert as core rationales for granting exclusive rights. However, generative models-capable of producing art, code, literature, and inventions autonomously-challenge these assumptions. This chapter interrogates whether existing human-centric IP justifications remain normatively sound when the "creator" may be an algorithm devoid of consciousness or volition. It argues that this epistemological and ontological shift exposes the need for considering the role of IP theory. This chapter advocates for a normative reappraisal of IP theory in light of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs, with their emphases on inclusive innovation, access to knowledge, climate action, and global equity, offer a values-based framework to assess whether IP rights for AI-generated works support or hinder broader social objectives. By engaging critically with theories of Lockean labor, Hegelian recognition, utilitarianism, and the commons, the paper explores whether post-human creativity calls for a re-evaluation of IP policies reconciled with IP theory. Ultimately, it posits that IP regimes are and have always been evolving to prioritise human flourishing. Rather than asking who owns AI output, the chapter attempts at asking how exclusive rights can serve the public interest in a post-human creative economy. This reorientation-from entitlement to responsibility-may be a turning point to align IP with the challenges of sustainable development in the 21st century.