Authors : Aatmajaa Shankar Prasada

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 11 - November

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4wc85tud

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/3es67eyr

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25nov1094

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : The advent of neurotechnology and artificial intelligence has shifted our perspective of property, ownership of thoughts, and neural data. This raises critical legal and philosophical questions regarding the ownership of thoughts, neural data, and cognitive outputs. Traditional intellectual property regimes safeguard creative expressions however, they do not recognize the direct recording of the mental activity through brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) and neurotechnology. Since there is a gap between mental labour and creative expression is becoming increasingly ambiguous, this paper tends to examine whether neural data can be classified as a form of property under prevailing legal theories, taking points from ideas of John Locke, Hegel, Karl Marx, and Michel Foucault to understand how ownership of thoughts and brain signals might fit into the existing legal theories.it further engages with Mark Rose historical study of authorship and Walter Benjamin’s insights on mechanical reproduction,to analyze whether AI-generated and neurogenerated content are to be protected under IP protections. Beyond the scope of intellectual property law, this paper examines the intersection of Mill’s concept of liberty1 , Arendt’s framework on labour, and Zuboff’s surveillance capitalism2 thesis , to emphasise the ethical implications of neural data ownership, specifically relating to mental privacy and cognitive autonomy. exploring case studies such as Chile’s Neurorights Law (2021)3 ,the paper provides further development in legislative developments and analyses how governments are responding to the risks of cognitive commodification. Finally, it proposes a legal framework for neural intellectual property that intersects technological invention with ethical imperatives, highlighting the importance of legal framework against the corporate monopolisation of human cognition. As there is a rapid increase in digital economy and its intersection with human thought, it is important to ensure that brain data and personal thoughts remain private and protected.

References :

1. John Stuart Mill, On Liberty 6 (John W. Parker & Son 1859), https://archive.org/details/onliberty00inmill/page/n6/mode/1up (last visited Mar. 30, 2025)
2. Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism [Page] (PublicAffairs 2019), https://archive.org/details/zuboff-shoshana.-the-age-of-surveillance-capitalism.-2019  (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
3. Neurorights Law, Ley No. 21.383, Nov. 25, 2021, Diario Oficial [D.O.] (Chile).
4. John Locke, Two Treatises of Government, edn Peter Laslett (Cambridge University Press 1988) Book II, ss 27–30.
5. Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power (PublicAffairs 2019) 93–119. 
6. Rafael Yuste and others, ‘Four Ethical Priorities for Neurotechnologies and AI’ (2017) 551 Nature 159.
7. Nita Farahany, The Battle for Your Brain: Defending the Right to Think Freely in the Age of Neurotechnology (St. Martin’s Press 2023) ch 2.
8. Mark A. Lemley, ‘The Myth of the Sole Inventor’ (2012) 110 Michigan L Rev 709, 740.
9. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council (General Data Protection Regulation) art 4(1), art 9.
10. Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 (India), s 2(n).
11. Marcello Ienca and Roberto Andorno, ‘Towards New Human Rights in the Age of Neuroscience and Neurotechnology’ (2017) 13 Life Sciences, Society and Policy 1.
12. John Locke, Two Treatises of Government, edn Peter Laslett (Cambridge University Press 1988) Book II, s 27.
13.  Justin Hughes, ‘The Philosophy of Intellectual Property’ (1988) 77 Geo LJ 287, 296–297.
14. John Locke (n 1) Book II, s 95.
15. Margaret Radin, Boilerplate: The Fine Print, Vanishing Rights, and the Rule of Law (Princeton University Press 2012) 21–25.
16. Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism (PublicAffairs 2019) 93–119.
17. Ibid 115
18. Ibid 137-139
19. Copyright Act 1957 (India) s 13(1); see also Eastern Book Company v D B Modak (2008) 1 SCC 1
20. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation), art 9.
21. Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 (India), s 2(n).
22. Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism (PublicAffairs 2019) 115–119.
23. Francisco José Vera and Rafael Yuste, ‘Neurotechnologies and Human Rights’ (2021) 5 Nature Human Behaviour 420