Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper analyzes the legal and normative implications of using generative AI tools in academic work, focusing on European copyright law and emerging AI regulations. It argues that authorship should be viewed as a qualitative threshold based on the degree of human intellectual control and creative autonomy, rather than a binary attribute. The authors propose a qualitative threshold framework to assess authorship in GenAI-aided academic work, distinguishing between legitimate AI assistance and practices that undermine authorship and academic integrity.
Current legal frameworks struggle to define authorship when AI tools contribute to academic work, but a qualitative threshold based on human intellectual control offers a path forward.
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 student where GenAI operates as cognitive support under human intellectual control. By contrast, attribution becomes legally and normatively disputable once AI output displaces creative autonomy. The analysis places this doctrinal framework alongside broader regulatory principles arising from the AI Act, data protection law, and emerging suprainstitutional governance practices in higher education. We propose a qualitative threshold framework designed to assist in authorship-sensitive assessment of GenAI-aided academic work. This framework provides criteria for distinguishing legitimate AI-assisted academic production from practices that undermine authorship, responsibility, and academic integrity.