The question of "Who is the true author of AI works?" is becoming one of the most noteworthy legal issues today. In the context of the ongoing revisions to the Intellectual Property Law and the Artificial Intelligence Law, Vietnam faces the need to clearly define copyright protection mechanisms, ensuring that technological development continues while safeguarding human creativity.
When works of art are not created solely by humans.
The emergence of music, paintings, videos , and articles created entirely by AI is changing the concept of "creative work." According to a report by the International Music Summit, more than 60 million people used AI tools to compose music in 2024.
This surge in popularity has led legal scholars to raise a series of questions: Who are the authors of these works? Are they protected by copyright? And who is responsible if infringement occurs? These questions become even more urgent as AI-powered music , painting, and literature become increasingly popular in Vietnam.
Vietnam currently lacks specific regulations for works created by AI. The existing law only protects creations of "direct human intelligence." The draft Law on Intellectual Property (amended) adds a category of objects not covered by protection: "products that are not the result of direct human intellectual creation." Therefore, products created by AI itself will not be protected by copyright or related rights.
Deputy Director of the Copyright Department (Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism) Pham Thi Kim Oanh emphasized: "This regulation aims to clearly affirm that only products bearing the creative imprint of human beings are considered works and are protected by copyright." This is a core principle in the entire intellectual property legal system, because the purpose of copyright protection is to encourage human creativity through granting exclusive rights to exploit and profit from the results of creativity.
Associate Professor Vu Thi Hai Yen (Hanoi Law University) commented: "If copyright protection is granted for works created by AI, the goal of encouraging creativity in copyright law becomes meaningless." Placing AI on par with humans in the role of author could lead to the opposite consequence: Artists become dependent on technology, thereby diminishing the true value of creativity.
Globally, legislative trends are also moving in this direction. US copyright law has long affirmed that it only protects "creations of human agents," excluding "non-human agents" from the scope of authorship. The US Copyright Office requires that all registered works must demonstrate human creativity and refuses to grant copyright to products "produced by automated machines without human creative intervention."
Humans are the creators, AI is the supporting tool.
However, the lack of protection for AI-generated works does not mean excluding all products with AI elements. This raises a new requirement: determining the level of human ingenuity in AI-generated products. Many countries have established specific criteria. Japan assesses based on the degree of user guidance, editing, and selection during the creation process. The European Union requires a “significant human creative imprint.” The UK and New Zealand even have separate regulations for “computer-generated works,” but still stipulate that the person who “sets the conditions for the computer to create the work” is the subject of copyright.
In Vietnam, experts believe that the process of amending the Intellectual Property Law and developing the Artificial Intelligence Law is an opportunity to clarify this issue. National Assembly representative To Ai Vang (Can Tho delegation) proposed adding specific policies on AI to the Intellectual Property Law to "determine who is the owner, the legal status of AI in creative activities, as well as responsibility when copyright infringement occurs."
Minister of Science and Technology Nguyen Manh Hung stated that the Artificial Intelligence Law currently under development is not only a legal framework but also a "statement of national vision"; placing people at the center and approaching management based on risk levels. One of the important principles is transparency and accountability, requiring AI-generated products to be clearly labeled so that users can identify them and determine responsibility in case of copyright disputes.
The draft Law on Artificial Intelligence, spearheaded by the Ministry of Science and Technology, stipulates mandatory labeling requirements for content (text, images, audio, video) created or significantly modified by AI. This regulation aims to clarify the origin of creation, prevent AI products from being mistaken for human works, and protect the legitimate rights of the true authors.
According to legal experts, this is a reasonable approach that helps establish a boundary between human and machine creativity, ensuring respect for human intelligence without hindering technological development. Vietnam needs to maintain a flexible legal system, ready to adapt to technological advancements, but still uphold the principle that only humans are the creative subjects, while AI is a supporting tool.
In the digital age, as AI becomes increasingly intelligent, protecting copyrights becomes even more urgent. Laws must not only keep pace with technology but also protect human intellect, labor, and creative emotions – the irreplaceable foundation of all progress.
Source: https://hanoimoi.vn/ban-quyen-tac-pham-ai-bai-toan-phap-ly-moi-trong-ky-nguyen-so-723083.html
![[Photo] National Assembly Chairman Tran Thanh Man visits and works with the National Assembly Committees and the State Audit Office.](https://vphoto.vietnam.vn/thumb/1200x675/vietnam/resource/IMAGE/2026/02/23/1771848141941_ndo_br_bnd-6798-jpg.webp)
Comment (0)