Artificial intelligence, besides blockchain, is the main topic discussed by representatives of nearly every branch of economy. Some entities are trying to search for their place in the world of artificial intelligence driven technology and others are looking carefully at the developments in the AI. Undoubtedly, software making use of the artificial intelligence can be viewed as something that can change the world we live in. The titles of press releases or other information sources are stimulating ones imagination in the range of possible application of artificial intelligence. At the same time, there is a group of people from the technology sector, that are concerned by the rapid and limitless development in this regard. The future of artificial intelligence and its application is still unknown but there are as many positive expectations as negative predictions. There are still many questions that have to be answered before the time that deep or strong AI will be prepared for everyday use. One of such questions is whether copyright is only dedicated for human beings? If the answer is affirmative than the next question that have to be asked is what form or type of protection can be used for works of art made not by humans? This are not the only problems that may arise (or has already arisen) from the use of AI.

The article in the eight paragraphs analyzes the issue of audiovisual work, in particular focusing on movie feature, providing the court rulings, in majority the Polish ones. The first section focuses on the clarification of the concept of an audiovisual work, using the textbook knowledge, the knowledge resulting from the polish Act of 4th February 1994 On Copyright and Related Rights and contained in the judgments of Polish courts, concluding that there is no leading definition of audiovisual work in the Polish legal system. Furthermore it considers the issue of co-authorship – who and to what extent has the right to call itself the creator of the audiovisual work. In this respect, it undertakes to clarify the contribution parts which pull together up the final image of an audiovisual work. In the next two sections it analyzes the beneficent of the audiovisual piece and defines the principles governing the relationship of beneficent and the author and the issue of remuneration for the authors work. In the fifth section it introduces the concept of collective management organizations, which is an organization that mediates the process of payment of accumulated remuneration to the creator. Section Six focuses on the issues of copyright protection and potential infringement, and states the rulings of courts, which allows reader to obtain a more practical understanding of the problem. Paragraph seventh evokes a complicated Polish case (the creator of „Stawka większa niż życie” vs. the creator of „Halo Hans!”). Finally paragraph eight focuses on a few cases executed in the field of copyright law in audiovisual work area in the United States.