BackDevelopment of new IP laws

This page is still being polished. If you have thoughts, please share them via the feedback form.

Data on this page is preliminary and may change. Please do not share or cite these figures publicly.

Development of new IP laws

ITechLaw (2019)|LLM classified

Mitigation Taxonomy

3Ecosystem

3.1Legal & Regulatory

3.1.1Legislation & Policy

Laws, legal frameworks, and binding policy instruments governing AI development and use.

Also in Legal & Regulatory

3.1.2 Regulatory Bodies3.1.3 International Agreements3.1.4 Compliance Requirements3.1.5 Enforcement Mechanisms

Additional Information

3.1 Governments should be cautious with revising existing IP laws. 3.2 Governments should explore the introduction of appropriate legislation (or the interpretation of existing laws) to clarify IP protection of AI enabled as well as AI created works, without seeking to create any new IP right at this stage. 3.3 When amending existing or implementing new IP laws, governments should seek adequately to balance the interests of all relevant stakeholders. 3.4 Governments should also explore a consensus in relation to AI and IP rights to allow for unhindered data flows across borders and the rapid dissemination of new technologies and seek to address these issues through an international treaty.

LLM Classification Details

Reasoning

Governments creating or amending domestic laws to clarify IP protection for AI-enabled and AI-created works.

Code: 3.1.1Version: v0.6Classified: Jan 27, 2026

Part of

AI and Intellectual Property

Organisations that develop, deploy or use AI systems should take necessary steps to protect the rights in the resulting works through appropriate and directed application of existing intellectual property rights laws. Governments should investigate how AI‑authored works may be further protected, without seeking to create any new IP right at this stage.

Other mitigations from ITechLaw (2019) (35)

Ethical Purpose and Societal Benefit

Organisations that develop, deploy or use AI systems and any national laws that regulate such use should require the purposes of such implementation to be identified and ensure that such purposes are consistent with the overall ethical purposes of beneficence and non-maleficence, as well as the other principles of the Policy Framework for Responsible AI.

3.2.2 Technical Standards

Lifecycle:Plan and DesignActor:Governance ActorAIRM:Govern

Ethical Purpose and Societal Benefit > Overarching principles

2.1.3 Policies & Procedures

Lifecycle:Other (general)Actor:DeveloperAIRM:Govern

Ethical Purpose and Societal Benefit > Work and automation

2.2.1 Risk Assessment

Lifecycle:Operate and MonitorActor:UserAIRM:Govern

Ethical Purpose and Societal Benefit > Environmental impact

2.2.1 Risk Assessment

Lifecycle:Other (outside lifecycle)Actor:DeployerAIRM:Measure

Ethical Purpose and Societal Benefit > Weaponised AI