Abstract

The expansion of generative artificial intelligence and its capacity to produce literary, artistic, and scientific works has confronted the traditional structure of intellectual property with fundamental questions. The central issue of this research is how works resulting from algorithmic processes and lacking direct human creativity can be evaluated from the perspective of Imami jurisprudence and the Iranian legal system, and to whom the attribution of their economic and moral rights can be justified. To this end, jurisprudential rules such as the principles of dominion (tasallut), respect for property, no-harm (la zarar), grounds of liability, and the presumption of validity are analyzed in order to clarify the extent to which these principles can be adapted to emerging technological phenomena. In the legal section, existing laws—including the 1969 Law for the Protection of Authors’ Rights and regulations on translation, reproduction, and software—are examined to assess their capacity to support works jointly produced by humans and artificial intelligence. The findings indicate that although jurisprudential foundations and Iran’s legal frameworks possess certain capacities to support this category of works, significant gaps remain in determining authorship, the scope of protection, and legal liability. Based on this analysis, a model is proposed that places the human designer or system supervisor at the center of rights attribution, while simultaneously preventing excessive technological monopolization. The conclusion is that integrating jurisprudential principles with contemporary intellectual property doctrines can provide a credible basis for regulating AI-generated works; however, the need for specialized and transparent legislation remains pressing. This research has been conducted using a descriptive–analytical method, relying on documentary research drawn from library resources, scholarly articles, and statutory laws.