Philippine IP Office Details Copyright Protections for AI-Assisted Creations Amid Global Concerns

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has brought significant innovation across global industries but also raised complex ethical and legal challenges. Among these is the growing misuse of AI, including deepfakes, disinformation, theft, and fraud, which have surged by 50% annually from 2022 to 2024 according to the AI Incident Database.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has highlighted that untrustworthy AI applications threaten workplace environments through breaches of data privacy, discrimination, bias, and lack of accountability. In response, entrepreneurs and public figures are implementing proactive measures to protect their intellectual property and reputations.

A notable example is American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift, who filed trademark applications for her voice and likeness after AI-generated images falsely suggested her endorsement of former US President Donald Trump in the 2024 election—despite her public support for then-Vice President Kamala Harris. Swift’s filings included photographs and audio recordings to assert control over her persona, although these applications remain pending registration.

US law firm Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP has observed that Swift’s strategy underscores a broader business imperative: companies rely heavily on distinctive voices and images as brand assets vulnerable to synthetic imitation.

In the Philippines, while no specific legislation currently governs AI misuse, existing copyright laws offer a framework to protect creators. Teodoro C. Pascua, Director General of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL), explained in an August 13, 2026 interview with The Business Manual that individuals can claim ownership of works created with AI assistance, but legal protection applies only to the human-generated portions.

Pascua emphasized the importance for businesses and freelancers to clearly identify which elements of their work are human-made and which involve AI contributions. This distinction is crucial for asserting copyright claims under current Philippine law.

"Applicants must specify the parts of a work that had AI involvement versus those created by humans," Pascua stated, highlighting the practical steps creators should take amid the evolving AI landscape.

The IPOPHL chief’s guidance serves as a timely advisory for Philippine enterprises navigating the challenges posed by AI technologies in intellectual property management. While legislative developments on AI misuse remain pending, leveraging existing copyright protections and clear documentation of human authorship can mitigate risks.

Taylor Swift’s trademark filings in the United States illustrate a proactive approach to safeguarding personal brand identity against AI-generated misappropriation. Philippine creators may draw lessons from this example to bolster their own IP strategies.

As AI continues to transform creative and commercial sectors, Philippine stakeholders are encouraged to remain vigilant and informed about their rights and responsibilities under current IP frameworks.

This article provides essential insights for businesses and freelancers seeking to understand the intersection of AI and intellectual property in the Philippines, emphasizing the need for careful attribution and protection of human creative input.