The Use of Human Voice and Speech in Language Technologies: The EU and Russian Intellectual Property Law Perspectives

• Author: Ilya Ilin, Aleksei Kelli
• Pages: 17-27

17

JURIDICA INTERNATIONAL 28/2019

Ilya Ilin Aleksei Kelli

Doctoral student Professor of Intellectual Property Law

University of Tartu University of Tartu

The Use of Human Voice

and Speech in Language

Technologies:

The EU and Russian Intellectual Property Law Perspectives

1. Introduction

Language technologies (LTs) have become an integral part of our everyday lives.*1 This article focuses on

the legal aspects of these technologies. Several legal challenges related to LTs have already been extensively

addressed (e.g., issues related to personal data, dissemination models, constitutional bases).*2 The authors

draw on previous research and extend it. In this paper, the authors concentrate on the legal status of voice

and speech from an intellectual property*3 (IP) perspective and on compatibility of the respective EU and

Russian legal regimes. Because of this di erent focus of the article, it does not cover issues related to the

protection of voice and speech in terms of personal data rights in the EU and Russia. These issues are

analysed in a separate paper.*4

 Examples of such technologies are automatic text translation, various services that provide language checks for writing, and

applications that vocalise text with an integrated speech-to-speech translation function. In October , Google demon-

strated its brand-new headphones (Pixel Buds), which have an integrated speech-to-speech translation function.

 See, e.g., J. Klavan, A. Tavast, A. Kelli (). The Legal Aspects of Using Data from Linguistic Experiments for Creating

Language Resources. – Frontiers in Artifi cial Intelligence and Applications (), pp. Е. Abstract available at http://

ebooks.iospress.nl/volumearticle/ (..); S. Calamai, C. Kolletzek, A. Kelli (). Towards a Protocol for the

Curation and Dissemination of Vulnerable People Archives. In: Inguna Skadin, Maria Eskevich (eds.). CLARIN Annual

Conference  Proceedings (CLARIN Annual Conference , – October , in Pisa, Italy). CLARIN (pp. Е).

Available at https://o ce.clarin.eu/v/CE---CLARIN_ConferenceProceedings.pdf (..); A. Kelli,

K. Lindén, K. Vider, P. Labropoulou, E. Ketzan, P. Kamocki, P. Straák (). Implementation of an Open Science Policy

in the Context of Management of CLARIN Language Resources: A Need for Changes? In: Selected Papers from the CLARIN

Annual Conference  (pp. Е). Linköping, Sweden: Linköping University Electronic Press. Available at https://

www.ep.liu.se/ecp///ecp.pdf (..); A. Kelli, K. Vider, H. Pisuke, T. Siil (). Constitutional Values

As a Basis for the Limitation of Copyright within the Context of Digitalization of the Estonian Language. In: Kalvis Torgans

(ed.). Constitutional Values in Contemporary Legal Space II, – November : Collection of Research Papers in

Conjunction with the th International Scientifi c Conference of the Faculty of Law of the University of Latvia (pp. Е).

Riga, Latvia: University of Latvia Press. – DOI: https://doi.org/./cvcls...

 Intellectual property (IP) is defi ned as rights resulting from intellectual activity in industrial, scientifi c, literary, or artistic

fi elds. Convention Establishing the World Intellectual Property Organization (signed in Stockholm on  July  and as

amended on  September ). Available at https://wipolex.wipo.int/en/text/ (..). IP is traditionally

divided into three main categories: ) copyright, ) related rights, and ) industrial property. The article addresses copyright

and related rights.

 See I. Ilin, A. Kelli (). The Use of Human Voice and Speech for the Development of Language Technologies: The EU and

Russian Data Protection Law Perspectives (forthcoming).

https://doi.org/10.12697/JI.2019.28.03