Logo PTI Logo FedCSIS

Position Papers of the 21st Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems

Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems, Volume 48

Operationalising Governance for AI-Generated Content: A Socio-Technical Approach Based on the MATH–COPE Framework

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2026F8932

Citation: Anja Maria Neubauer (). Operationalising Governance for AI-Generated Content: A Socio-Technical Approach Based on the MATH–COPE Framework. In M. Bolanowski, M. Ganzha, M. Grzegorowski, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki, A. Paszkiewicz, D. Ślęzak (eds), Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems. ACSIS, Vol. 48, pages 119–125.

Full text

Abstract. Generative AI systems pose a challenge to traditional copyright governance due to their complex, non-linear data pipelines and automated content creation processes. Current frameworks, which are still based on human authorship and linear production models, have difficulty addressing key issues such as authorship attribution, accountability of training data, protection of moral rights, and recognition of human originality. Building on prior qualitative research, this paper applies the MATH--COPE framework --- a legal--socio-technical model that systematically links the four problem domains of copyright (Moral Rights, Authorship, Training Data and Human Originality) with the four dimensions of governance (Commercialisation, Organisational Practice, Policy and Governance, and Ethical Technology). The paper then extends this foundation by proposing an operational governance-by-design approach that identifies concrete intervention points across the AI system lifecycle, from data ingestion to output generation. By translating legal and ethical requirements into technical architectures and organisational processes, the framework promotes transparency, accountability, interoperability and regulatory compliance. This work offers a structured pathway for the responsible governance of AI-generated content within businesses and wider society.

References

  1. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, Sept. 9, 1886, as revised at Paris on July 24, 1971 and amended Sept. 28, 1979. Available: https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/283698
  2. World Intellectual Property Organization, “Revised Issues Paper on Intellectual Property Policy and Artificial Intelligence,” WIPO/IP/AI/2/GE/20/1 REV, May 29, 2020. Available: https://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=499504
  3. European Union, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act), Official Journal of the European Union, L 2024/1689, July 12, 2024. Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj
  4. G. Baxter and I. Sommerville, “Socio-technical systems: From design methods to systems engineering,” Interacting with Computers, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 4–17, 2011, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2010.07.003
  5. R. Williams and D. Edge, “The social shaping of technology,” Research Policy, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 865–899, 1996, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(96)00885-2
  6. K. Prifti, J. Morley, C. Novelli, et al., “Regulation by Design: Features, Practices, Limitations, and Governance Implications,” Minds and Machines, vol. 34, article 13, 2024, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11023-024-09675-z
  7. A. M. Neubauer, “AI and Authorship Redefined: Towards a Global Copyright Framework for Commerce and Human Originality,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Gloucestershire, 2025. https://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29704.69126
  8. A. M. Neubauer, M. Wynn, and R. Bown, “AI, Authorship, Copyright, and Human Originality,” Encyclopedia, vol. 6, no. 1, article 9, 2026, https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia6010009