Philippines’ draft guidelines on AI: unpacking the key points as consultation held

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Philippines’ draft guidelines on AI: unpacking the key points as consultation held

Sponsored by

hechanova-400px.png
Philippines flag with overlay of AI on globe with networks and digital image of a human head
Shutterstock

Editha R Hechanova of Hechanova Group outlines how the guidelines clarify human creative contribution, disclosure requirements, and the registrability of AI-assisted and AI-enhanced works

The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) hosted a public consultation on its draft Guidelines on the Registrability of AI Systems and AI-Related Works on September 10 and 11 2026.

The Philippines has a National AI Strategy that recognises the need to maximise its benefits but at the same time address possible risks by way of policies and governance frameworks for the responsible use of AI. These guidelines are intended to clarify the registrability of works involving AI and ensure the consistent application of the requirements of copyright protection and registration.

The Philippines is a member of the Berne Convention, and under Republic Act 8293 (the IP Code), copyright protection is automatic from the moment of creation; hence, registration is optional but desirable, particularly when filing a suit for infringement, because it is prima facie evidence of ownership of the work.

The salient points of the guidelines are as follows.

  • Applicability of the IP Code – the Copyright Registration Rules and its prescribed forms under the IP Code shall apply to applications covered by the guidelines.

  • Disclosure of AI use the applicant shall disclose the use of generative AI in the creation of the work.

  • Human creative contribution and originality – a work involving the use of an AI system shall be registrable only to the extent that it contains original expression attributable to human creative contribution satisfying the originality requirement under prevailing jurisprudence. The mere provision of a prompt, instruction, or other input to an AI system shall not, by itself, establish sufficient human creative contribution.

  • Evaluation of AI-related applications in evaluating whether the claimed expression satisfies the requirements of human authorship, originality, and the minimum degree of creativity, the IPOPHL may use the following factors, which shall be considered in their totality:

    • The nature and extent of the human creative contribution;

    • The nature and extent of the AI system’s role in the creation of the work;

    • The manner in which AI-generated elements were selected, modified, arranged, or incorporated into the work; and

    • The information and materials submitted by the applicant.

  • Who shall be considered authors? The human person who contributed the original expression in the following works: AI-assisted, AI-enhanced, hybrid, or AI-generated output. There must be sufficient original human expression in the creative work.

  • AI system – where an AI system embodies a copyrightable computer program, the author and copyright owner shall be determined in accordance with the IP Code and applicable law. The AI system itself shall not be considered an author or copyright owner. Registration of an AI system shall cover only the copyrightable expression embodied in the computer program. Registration shall not confer copyright in:

    • AI training data;

    • Works or materials used as AI training data;

    • AI outputs; or

    • Material that does not form part of the copyrightable computer program.

  • Examples of registrability for AI-assisted and AI-enhanced works – as indicated earlier, an AI-assisted work may be registrable to the extent that it contains original expression resulting from human creative contribution satisfying the originality requirement under the IP Code and Philippine jurisprudence:

    • AI-assisted literary work – an author uses an AI system to suggest alternative wording or organise portions of a manuscript but selects, revises, and creatively arranges the resulting text; and

    • An AI-enhanced work may be registrable to the extent that the underlying work and the human-created additions or modifications contain original expression satisfying the originality requirement under prevailing jurisprudence.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

From cross-border jurisdiction to the end of the transitional period, Powell Gilbert’s Ioana Sabau and Bryce Matthewson predict the biggest talking points ahead
A wave of office launches and lateral hires reflect the draw of patent disputes, but booming AI, semiconductor and data centre markets are offering an even bigger IP opportunity
The hire of Frederick Nicolle as a partner continues Pinsent Masons' expansion while reducing Simmons’ patent prosecution offering in London to zero
The expansion into Granada forms part of a national ‘decentralisation’ strategy focused on providing proximity to research and tech businesses away from traditional hubs
Three successive wins have got the firm eyeing additional opportunities as ITC work booms
While many firms remain focused on generative AI, recent hires and practice launches suggest the next battle may be for lawyers who understand how AI is moving into the physical world
The explosion of data centres has prompted patent pool operators to create new licensing opportunities
The court struck out copyright claims brought by Ladbrokes owner Entain, saying that ownership details should have been completed before litigation began
Düsseldorf has overtaken Munich as the UPC's busiest division, while firms including Winston Taylor, Clifford Chance, and Hoyng Rokh Monegier featured in disputes involving Abbott, Essity, Amazon and Hurom
The managing partner gave up an equity partnership track in New York to build a practice in India. More than a decade later, she discusses entrepreneurship, leadership, and why women should not wait before taking the next step
Gift this article