At the same time, the Ukrainian legislator requires mandatory permission to use the work in the process of generating an AI object, under the threat of the impossibility of “using” the right to the generated object.
It is striking that the legislator uses the term “ use of the right”, as opposed to the term “ exercise of the right”, which the legislator uses in other similar cases – on derivative works (Part 2 of Article 17), on composite works (Part 1 of Article 18) and on incorporated works (Part 2 of Article 19).
In general, a subject of a special kind of right (sui generis) has (1) the right to use a non-original special database object generated by a computer program in any way(s), as well as (2) the exclusive right to permit or prohibit the use of a non-original object generated by a computer program by other persons (reference from Part 4 of Article 33 to Part 1 of Article 12 of the UAAiSP).
In this context, limiting the “ of a special kind (sui generis) to a non-original object generated by a computer program would be understandable.
Regarding the restriction of the " use of the right" of a special kind (sui generis) to a non-original object generated by a computer program, the question arises:
Does this restriction cover both the right of the subject's personal use of the generated object and the exclusive right to authorize or prohibit the use of the generated object by other persons? Or, perhaps, this restriction covers only the exclusive right to authorize or prohibit the use of the generated object by other persons, i.e., the prohibition to "use" the right in the sense of generating income.