Ownership
“Who owns it?” is really two questions. Is the thing protected by copyright at all — and if it is, whose is it? Philippine law answers the second one precisely, in clauses written long before generative AI existed, and answers the first by implication. Here is what the Intellectual Property Code actually says, and what it means for a brand paying for AI-made work.
The law starts with a person
The Code defines the term plainly. Section 171.1: “‘Author’ is the natural person who has created the work.” Section 172.1 then protects “original intellectual creations in the literary and artistic domain… from the moment of their creation”, and Section 178.1 says copyright “shall belong to the author of the work”.
Read those three together and the chain is: creation by a natural person → a work → an author → an owner. A model is not a natural person, so output with no human creative input has no author for the copyright to attach to. The Code dates from 1997 and says nothing about AI; nothing in it has to, because the definition does the work.
“a natural person”
How the Intellectual Property Code defines an author (Sec. 171.1). Most of this question is settled by those three words.
The same starting point appears outside the Philippines. The US Copyright Office’s January 2025 report concluded that AI output is protected only where a human author determined enough of the expressive elements, and that prompts alone are not enough. Different statutes, same principle: a person has to have made the creative choices.
The clause that catches brands
Most brands assume that paying for work transfers the copyright. In the Philippines it does not, unless someone wrote it down. Section 178.4: where a work is commissioned by someone who is not the author’s employer and who pays for it, “the person who so commissioned the work shall have ownership of the work, but the copyright thereto shall remain with the creator, unless there is a written stipulation to the contrary”.
You own the file. The agency keeps the copyright. That is the default, and a written stipulation is the only thing that changes it.
| Who made it | Who holds the copyright by default |
| Your employee, as part of their job | The employer (178.3b), unless there is an agreement to the contrary |
| Your employee, outside their regular duties | The employee (178.3a) — even if they used company time, facilities and materials |
| An agency or freelancer you commissioned | You own the work; the creator keeps the copyright unless a written stipulation says otherwise (178.4) |
| An audiovisual work | The producer, the scenario author, the composer, the director and the author of the adapted work together; the producer exercises the copyright, subject to their stipulations (178.5) |
What that means for an AI-made campaign
→ Separate the human parts from the generated parts. A campaign is rarely all one or the other. The concept, script, art direction, selection and edit are human work. Treat them as the protectable layer and say so in the deliverables list.
→ Put the transfer in writing, in the contract. Section 178.4 makes the written stipulation the deciding fact. A purchase order is not a copyright assignment. If the brand needs to own the copyright, the words have to be there before the work starts.
→ Keep the record of who decided what. Because protection follows human authorship, the evidence is the brief, the direction given, the versions rejected and the edits made. Build that record as the work is produced, not after someone asks.
→ Remember the moral rights. Section 193 gives the author the right to be attributed and to object to distortion or mutilation of the work, “independently of the economic rights… or the grant of an assignment or license”. They sit apart from the copyright you just bought.
Three lines worth having in the contract
Who owns the copyright in the delivered work, in those words. Which elements are AI-generated and which are human-made. What the production record will contain and when it is handed over. Settle all three before the first generation, not at invoicing.
General information, not legal advice. Have your own counsel read the contract. The position also differs by country, so check the law where the work will run.
Where PUNX fits
PUNX produces AI-generated brand content from Makati, with P&G, San Miguel, Petron, GCash and Sun Life on our client list. Concept and direction are set by people, generation runs on an AI pipeline, and the record of both is part of the deliverable. What has to be disclosed, and to whom, is a separate question — brand-safe AI production covers it.
FAQ
Who owns AI-generated content in the Philippines?
The Intellectual Property Code defines an author as “the natural person who has created the work” (Sec. 171.1) and gives copyright to the author (Sec. 178.1). Output with no human creative input has no author for copyright to attach to. Where a person made the creative choices, the ordinary ownership rules apply to that work.
If we pay an agency for AI content, do we own the copyright?
Not automatically. Section 178.4 says the person who commissioned the work owns the work, but the copyright stays with the creator unless there is a written stipulation to the contrary. If you need the copyright, it has to be written into the contract.
Does our employee’s AI work belong to the company?
It depends on their duties. Section 178.3 gives the copyright to the employer where the work is the result of regularly-assigned duties, unless agreed otherwise, and to the employee where creating it is not part of their regular duties — even if they used company time, facilities and materials.
Is AI-generated work protected by copyright anywhere?
The US Copyright Office’s January 2025 report says AI output is protected only where a human author determined enough of the expressive elements, and that prompts alone are not enough. Using AI to assist, or including AI material in a larger human-made work, does not bar protection.
Related
AI content production — the service, from brief to delivery
Brand-safe AI production — disclosure, consent and the record behind them
AI vs traditional production — when to shoot it instead
Not sure what you own?
Send us the contract and the deliverables list. We will tell you which parts are protectable and what the wording is missing.
Start a project ↗