Legal Challenges Emerge Over Intellectual Property Rights for AI-Created Works

Artificial intelligence (AI) is playing an expanding role in creative processes, from composing music and producing paintings to developing software and technological inventions. This surge in AI-generated content has sparked critical questions about how intellectual property (IP) rights should be allocated and protected.

Three years ago, Xuan Huong, a young technician based in Hanoi, began experimenting with AI-powered music composition tools. Initially motivated by curiosity, she quickly recognized AI’s capacity to assist in creating music. By providing simple prompts, AI systems can arrange compositions, orchestrate pieces, and even generate vocals across diverse musical styles. Huong has since produced hundreds of songs, many of which have been purchased by businesses for use in communications and brand promotion.

Despite this success, Huong expressed uncertainty regarding legal protections. “If a copyright dispute arises one day, will I be protected by law? I may have written the lyrics, but the music was partly generated with AI assistance. I genuinely do not know who owns the rights to that product,” she said.

This concern is widespread among creators using AI tools. When AI directly contributes to the creative process, questions arise about authorship: should the user, the AI developer, or the platform owner be recognized as the author?

Legal experts identify this as one of the most significant challenges AI poses to existing IP frameworks. Professor Hoang Van Kiem, former Chairman of the State Professorship Council for Information Technology and Chairman of the Scientific and Training Council of Saigon International University, explained that current IP laws are fundamentally designed to protect human creativity.

“With AI advancing rapidly, an increasing number of products and inventions are created almost entirely through automated processes, with little or no direct human intervention,” Kiem noted. “This raises a host of legal questions. Can AI-generated products be protected in the same way as human inventions? If so, who should own those rights?”

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is actively examining these issues, seeking appropriate legal solutions. Some countries, including the United Kingdom and Japan, have begun proposing amendments to their IP laws to accommodate AI developments. However, no comprehensive international consensus has yet emerged.

While AI offers significant opportunities for digital economic growth, it simultaneously creates an urgent need for effective regulatory frameworks to address ownership and authorship concerns.

Tran Le Hong, Deputy Director of the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam under the Ministry of Science and Technology, emphasized the absence of international agreement on ownership of AI-generated works. “Some argue that rights should belong to AI developers because they create the underlying tools. Others contend that users should hold the rights because they provide the prompts, input data, and creative direction,” he said.

The reality is more complex, as multiple stakeholders may contribute to a single AI-generated product, including algorithm designers, software developers, platform owners, training data providers, and end users. “There are numerous overlapping interests surrounding AI-generated products. That is why countries have yet to reach a common position,” Hong added.

Vietnam has adopted a cautious approach. Its current regulations neither explicitly accept nor reject copyright protection for AI-generated works. Instead, they maintain the fundamental principle that protected intellectual property must be linked to human creative activity.

For patent applications, Vietnamese law requires applicants to demonstrate that AI served only as a supporting tool rather than the actual creator of the invention.

Nonetheless, AI has been incorporated into Vietnam’s amended Intellectual Property Law as an important policy direction. This inclusion reflects the country’s intention to encourage AI development while gradually studying legal mechanisms to address emerging IP challenges related to AI-generated works.