Copyright registration of works created using artificial intelligence (AI) may be allowed if they contain sufficient original human creative expression under proposed guidelines.
The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL), through its Bureau of Copyright and Related Rights (BCRR), has proposed the Guidelines on the Registrability of AI Systems and AI-Related Works to clarify the registration requirements for AI-related works under existing Philippine copyright law, placing human creativity at the center of assessing registrability.
“The proposed guidelines do not regulate AI generally or make a definitive determination on the copyrightability of AI-related works, but aim to provide greater clarity on their treatment for registration with IPOPHL,” IPOPHL Director General Teodoro C. Pascua clarified during an initial public consultation in September 2026.
According to IPOPHL, the proposed guidelines remain subject to further stakeholder consultations and revisions.
Under the draft, using AI in creating a work does not automatically disqualify it from registration. However, copyright protection may extend only to original human expression that meets the legal requirement of originality, which depends on independent creation and sufficient intellectual creativity and judgment.
The proposed guidelines identify four categories of AI-related works and their corresponding treatment for copyright registration:
- AI-assisted works: AI is used as a tool in the creative process, with copyright protection covering qualifying original expression contributed by the human author.
- AI-enhanced works: Human-created works subsequently modified or enhanced using AI, with protection potentially extending to the original work and qualifying human-created modifications.
- Hybrid works: Works combining human-authored and AI-generated elements that may qualify for registration based on the human contribution, without extending protection to AI-generated elements that do not independently qualify for copyright.
- AI-generated outputs: Outputs without sufficient human creative contribution that would not qualify for registration to the extent that they lack original human expression. An image generated from a general AI prompt without further creative contributions to its expressive elements would not acquire copyright protection merely through registration.
Under the proposed guidelines, IPOPHL may consider the nature and extent of human creative contribution, the role of the AI system, how AI-generated elements were selected, modified, arranged or incorporated, and the information submitted by applicants when evaluating registration applications.
The assessment would depend on the circumstances of each application rather than a fixed test, with IPOPHL able to request additional information when necessary.
For the registration of AI systems, the draft limits coverage to copyrightable expression in the submitted computer program, excluding AI training data, works or materials used for training, AI-generated outputs and other materials outside the copyrightable program.
The draft also clarifies that registration would not determine whether the use of training data or related training practices constitutes fair use or is otherwise lawful.
Follow Tan Briones & Associates on LinkedIn for more legal updates and law-related articles.
