Aspects of Ownership Rights of Data and the Global Distribution of Wealth Generated by Artificial Intelligence

Authors

  • Tarms Kagbala Federal Polytechnic, Ekowe, Bayelsa State.

Keywords:

Artificial intelligence, Data generated by AI, Ownership, Property, Intellectual Property, De facto Ownership

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems now shape core aspects of everyday life and the global economy. They learn from huge volumes of data, generate new data through use, and produce outputs that themselves can be monetised. Yet the law does not treat “data” as a single object that someone simply owns. Instead, control over data sits at the intersection of intellectual property, data protection, trade secrecy, contract and sector-specific rules. This article makes three main claims. First, “data generated by AI” is not one thing but a bundle of very different kinds of data, each treated differently under existing legal regimes. Second, taken together, current rules tend to concentrate control and value in the hands of a small group of powerful firms and countries, reinforcing what many scholars describe as “data colonialism”. Third, if the world is serious about reducing the global inequality that AI may deepen, we need both clearer domestic rules on data rights and international mechanisms for sharing some of the wealth created by AI. The article concludes by sketching elements of a fairer governance model: stronger user and community rights in data, targeted data-sharing obligations, a global AI fund and data framework, and closer links between AI governance, competition law, taxation and environmental justice.

References

Nick Couldry and Ulises A Mejias, The Costs of Connection: How Data is Colonizing Human Life and Appropriating It for Capitalism (Stanford University Press, 2019).

OECD, Artificial Intelligence in Society (OECD 2019) 17–24.

World Trade Organisation, World Trade Report 2024: Artificial Intelligence, Trade and Development (WTO 2024).

Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2023 on harmonised rules for fair access to and use of data (Data Act) [2023] OJ L20/1.

Carys E Gray, ‘More than Extraction: Rethinking Data’s Colonial Political Economy’ (2023) 17 International Political Sociology olad007.

Nicolò Lucchi, Generative AI and Copyright (European Parliamentary Research Service 2025).

ibid.

OECD (n 2) ch 4.

Case C-5/08 Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening EU:C:2009:465 [33]–[37].

Case C-604/10 Football Dataco Ltd v Yahoo! UK Ltd EU: C:2012:115.

Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, arts 7–10.

Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets).

Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 (General Data Protection Regulation), arts 12–23.

GDPR, art 20; Data Act (n 4) arts 4–5.

World Bank, Global Trends in AI Governance: Evolving Country Approaches (World Bank 2024).

OECD (n 2) 115–22.

Couldry and Mejias (n 1).

Data Act (n 4) ch IV.

US Copyright Office, ‘Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing AI-Generated Material’ (2023) 88 Fed Reg 16190.

Thaler v Perlmutter (DCCir, 2025) (summarised in ‘US appeals court rejects copyrights for AI-generated art lacking “human” creator’ (Reuters, 18 March 2025)).

Lucchi (n 6).

Cooley LLP, ‘Copyright Ownership of Generative AI Outputs Varies Around the World’ (Cooley, 2024).

ibid; see also Lucchi (n 6).

WTO (n 3).

WTO (n 3).

‘Data Colonialism in AI’ (Sustainability Directory, 2025).

Couldry and Mejias (n 1).

Nick Couldry, ‘Making Data Colonialism Liveable: How Might Data’s Social Order Be Regulated?’ (2019) 8(2) Internet Policy Review.

Gray (n 5).

UNNick Couldry, ‘Making Data Colonialism Liveable: How Might Data’s Social Order Be Regulated?’ (2019) 8(2) Internet Policy Review.

UNNick Couldry, ‘Making Data Colonialism Liveable: How Might Data’s Social Order Be Regulated?’ (2019) 8(2) Internet Policy Review.

OECD, ‘OECD Principles on Artificial Intelligence’ (2019).

OECD (n 2).

UNESCO, ‘Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence’ (2021).

UN Secretary-General, ‘A Global Digital Compact – An Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All’ (Policy Brief, 2023).

‘UN advisory body makes seven recommendations for governing AI’ (Reuters, 19 September 2024).

Data Act (n 4) arts 4–5.

Payal Arora, ‘Creative Data Justice: A Decolonial and Indigenous Approach to AI-enabled Technologies’ (2024) Information, Communication & Society.

Data Act (n 4) ch IV.

OECD (n 2) ch 4.

Data Act (n 4) chs II–III.

World Bank (n 15); UN Secretary-General (n 34).

World Bank (n 15); UN Secretary-General (n 34).

‘Data Colonialism in AI’ (n 26).

Downloads

Published

2025-11-18

How to Cite

Kagbala, T. (2025). Aspects of Ownership Rights of Data and the Global Distribution of Wealth Generated by Artificial Intelligence. Journal of Communication and Culture (JCC), 12(3), 217–229. Retrieved from https://icidr.org.ng/index.php/Jcc/article/view/1815