Home›Tables ·Jurisdiction × Topic matrix ·Live · sourced from verified claims
Frameworks · Cross-jurisdiction matrix

IP & AI

Copyright, training data and patents when AI is involved in creation, training or invention. Six atomic claims across nine jurisdictions. Each cell is sourced to a primary statute or court ruling, or marked Editorial when no source can be quoted. Editor: David Longford.

JurisdictionCopyrightTraining DataPatents
AI-Only Works · CopyrightabilityAre works generated solely by AI (no human creative contribution) eligible for copyright protection in this jurisdiction?AI-Only Works · AuthorshipWhen a work is generated solely by AI, does the law name a human or legal person as the author — and if so, who?Non-Commercial TDM · ResearchCan researchers perform text-and-data mining on copyrighted works without a licence for scientific or non-commercial purposes?Commercial TDM · AI TrainingCan commercial actors (including AI developers) train models on copyrighted works without a licence, subject to opt-out or any other limit?AI as InventorCan an AI system be designated as the inventor on a patent application in this jurisdiction?AI-Assisted InventorshipWhen an AI system contributes materially to an invention, does the law require a human inventor and how is contribution-by-AI treated?
United Kingdom →Untested
CDPA 1988 s.9(3)
Source-confirmed
Untested
CDPA 1988 s.9(3)
Source-confirmed
Yes
CDPA 1988 s.29A
Source-confirmed
No
(no commercial TDM in CDPA — s.29A explicitly non-commercial only)
Source-confirmed (negative)
No
Thaler v Comptroller-General [2023] UKSC 49 (Patents Act 1977 ss.7+13)
Source-confirmed
Untested
Thaler [2023] UKSC 49 obiter (Lord Kitchin)
Editorial
United States →No
Zarya of the Dawn (US Copyright Office, 21 Feb 2023)
Source-confirmed
No
Thaler v Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 18 Mar 2025)
Source-confirmed
Unsettled
17 U.S.C. § 107 (general fair use)
Source-confirmed (fair use text) + Editorial (no statutory TDM exception)
Unsettled
17 U.S.C. § 107 (fact-by-fact fair use; multiple pending suits)
Editorial
No
Thaler v Vidal, 43 F.4th 1207, No. 21-2347 (Fed. Cir. 5 Aug 2022)
Source-confirmed
Unsettled
(post-Thaler v Vidal — open question)
Editorial
Japan →No
Copyright Act Art 2(1)(i)
Source-confirmed (definition) + Editorial (AI lacks element)
No framework
Copyright Act Art 14 (Presumption of Authorship)
Source-confirmed
Yes
Copyright Act Art 30-4
Source-confirmed
Yes
Copyright Act Art 30-4
Source-confirmed
No
JPO practice (no reported AI-inventor case)
Editorial
Untested
JPO practice (no specific guidance)
Editorial
European Union →No
Painer C-145/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:798
Source-confirmed
No
(no EU-level provision creating an authorship rule for AI-generated works)
Editorial
Yes
DSM Directive 2019/790 Art 3
Source-confirmed
Yes
DSM Directive 2019/790 Art 4 (with rightholder opt-out)
Source-confirmed
No
EPO J 8/20 (DABUS), Legal Board of Appeal, 21 Dec 2021
Source-confirmed
Yes
EPO Guidelines for Examination Part G Ch II §3.3.1 (Apr 10 cited 'Part A IV §5.2' — wrong section)
Editorial
China →Unsettled
Beijing Internet Court (2023) Jing 0491 Min Chu No. 11279
Editorial
Unsettled
Copyright Law Art 11
Source-confirmed
No
Copyright Law Art 24 (closed list of fair-use exceptions)
Editorial
No
Copyright Law Art 24 (closed list)
Editorial
No
Patent Law Art 6
Source-confirmed
No framework
(no statutory or case guidance on AI-assisted inventorship)
Editorial
Singapore →No framework
(no statutory provision; Apr 10 cite of CA 2021 s.27 was fabricated)
Editorial (revised)
N/A
(Apr 10 cite was fabricated; SG CA 2021 has no computer-generated works provision)
N/A
Yes
Copyright Act 2021 s.244
Source-confirmed
Yes
Copyright Act 2021 s.244
Source-confirmed
Untested
Patents Act s.2(1) — 'inventor' defined as 'actual deviser'
Editorial
No framework
(no statutory or case guidance)
Editorial
South Korea →No
Copyright Act Art 2(1)
Source-confirmed
No
Copyright Act Art 2(2)
Source-confirmed
Unsettled
Copyright Act Art 35-3 (Apr 10 cited '35-5' — non-existent article)
Source-confirmed (corrected article)
Unsettled
Copyright Act Art 35-3 (general fair use only)
Editorial
No
Patent Act (natural person inventor)
Editorial
No framework
(no statutory or case guidance)
Editorial
India →No
Copyright Act 1957 s.2(d)
Source-confirmed
No
Copyright Act 1957 s.2(d)
Source-confirmed
Limited
Copyright Act 1957 s.52(1)(a)
Source-confirmed
No
(no commercial TDM — s.52(1)(a) limited to private/personal/research)
Source-confirmed (negative)
Untested
Patents Act 1970 s.6 ("true and first inventor")
Editorial
No framework
(no statutory or case guidance)
Editorial
Australia →No
Acohs v Ucorp [2012] FCAFC 16
Source-confirmed
No
Acohs v Ucorp [2012] FCAFC 16
Source-confirmed
Limited
Copyright Act 1968 s.40
Source-confirmed
No
Copyright Act 1968 (no commercial TDM)
Source-confirmed (negative)
No
Commissioner of Patents v Thaler [2022] FCAFC 62
Source-confirmed
Untested
Commissioner of Patents v Thaler [2022] FCAFC 62 (obiter)
Source-confirmed (via Claim 5 source)
How each reference table is built Four-stage process · every statement is hash-pinned to source and reviewed by a human editor before publication.
Stage 1 · Machine
Source archival
Primary regulator texts are fetched directly from official portals and hash-pinned.
Stage 2 · AI
Dual-judge verification
Two independent AI systems must both locate the exact supporting text in the source.
Stage 3 · Machine
Reconciliation
Disagreements between the two judges are flagged and escalated to the editor.
Stage 4 · Human
Editorial sign-off
The PAI editor reviews every page, checks a sample against source, and signs before publication.
Claim coverage · Jurisdiction × topic matrix
Claims captured in the last 30 days, by jurisdiction and topic. Click to reveal.
Show →
Live coverage

Jurisdiction × topic matrix

Verified-claim counts captured by the coverage engine at every jurisdiction × topic intersection in the last 30 days. Empty cells mean no claim has been captured yet — not that nothing happened.

Claims · 30d 0 80+
Window
Metric
Jurisdiction PrivacyGDPR-family, local DPAs AIAI Act, NIST-AI RMF, sector CyberNIS2, CISA, NCSC Enforcementfines, orders, settlements Consultationsopen rulemaking StandardsISO/IEC, CEN, NIST IPtraining-data, trade secret Total
EU
European UnionEU institutions · 27 MS
 84today84 claims · 30d · last today 72today72 claims · 30d · last today 43yesterday43 claims · 30d · last yesterday 91today91 claims · 30d · last today 183d ago18 open consultations 914 Apr9 standards claims 411 Apr4 IP claims 321
GB
United KingdomUK-wide + devolved
 51today51 privacy claims · 30d 46today46 AI claims · 30d 24yesterday24 cyber claims · NCSC-led 1916 Apr19 enforcement claims 717 Apr7 open consultations 312 Apr3 standards claims 209 Apr2 IP claims 152
DE
GermanyBund + 16 Länder
 67today67 privacy claims · 17 DPAs 28today28 AI claims 22today22 cyber claims · BSI-led 38today38 enforcement claims 815 Apr8 open consultations 310 Apr3 standards claims (DIN) —No IP claims captured yet 166
FR
FranceNational
 78today78 privacy claims · CNIL-led 19yesterday19 AI claims 1115 Apr11 cyber claims · ANSSI 42today42 enforcement claims 412 Apr4 open consultations —No standards claims captured yet —No IP claims captured yet 154
IT
ItalyNational
 29today29 privacy claims · Garante 1216 Apr12 AI claims 511 Apr5 cyber claims · ACN 1417 Apr14 enforcement claims 209 Apr2 open consultations —No standards claims captured yet —No IP claims captured yet 62
ES
SpainNational
 26today26 privacy claims · AEPD 1117 Apr11 AI claims · AESIA-led 612 Apr6 cyber claims 1316 Apr13 enforcement claims 310 Apr3 open consultations —No standards claims captured yet —No IP claims captured yet 59
IE
IrelandNational
 12today12 privacy claims · DPC 414 Apr4 AI claims 311 Apr3 cyber claims 18today18 enforcement claims — DPC Meta/Google 208 Apr2 consultations —No standards claims captured yet —No IP claims captured yet 39
US
United States (federal)FTC, NIST, CISA, agencies
 22today22 privacy claims · no federal statute yet 44today44 AI claims 48today48 cyber claims · CISA + NIST 27today27 enforcement claims · FTC-led 1615 Apr16 open rulemakings 34today34 standards claims · NIST CSF / AI RMF 813 Apr8 IP claims · USCO GenAI guidance 199
US
CaliforniaState
 39today39 privacy claims · CPPA + CA AG 28today28 AI claims · ADMT-led 510 Apr5 cyber claims 22today22 enforcement claims · CA AG + CPPA 1116 Apr11 open rulemakings —No standards claims captured yet —No IP claims captured yet 105
US
ColoradoState
 414 Apr4 privacy claims 17today17 AI claims · Colorado AI Act — 209 Apr2 enforcement claims 311 Apr3 open consultations — — 26
CA
CanadaFederal + provinces
 12yesterday12 privacy claims · OPC-led 1015 Apr10 AI claims · AIDA still in committee 613 Apr6 cyber claims · CSE-led 310 Apr3 enforcement claims 208 Apr2 open consultations — — 33
JP
JapanNational
 9today9 privacy claims · PPC 16today16 AI claims · AI Promotion Act 511 Apr5 cyber claims · NISC 209 Apr2 enforcement claims 213 Apr2 open consultations — — 34
KR
South KoreaNational
 516 Apr5 privacy claims · PIPC 22today22 AI claims · AI Basic Act in force — 412 Apr4 enforcement claims — — — 31
CN
ChinaNational
 814 Apr8 privacy claims · CAC 36today36 AI claims · CAC + MIIT 610 Apr6 cyber claims · MSS / MIIT — 215 Apr2 open consultations — — 52
SG
SingaporeNational
 413 Apr4 privacy claims · PDPC 11today11 AI claims · IMDA AI Verify 312 Apr3 cyber claims · CSA — — 211 Apr2 standards · ISO participation — 20
AU
AustraliaFederal
 11today11 privacy claims · OAIC 613 Apr6 AI claims · DISR-led 411 Apr4 cyber claims · ASD 209 Apr2 enforcement claims 712 Apr7 open consultations · Privacy Act Tranche 2 — — 30
BR
BrazilNational
 9today9 privacy claims · ANPD 815 Apr8 AI claims · PL 2338 in Senate — 311 Apr3 enforcement claims 210 Apr2 open consultations — — 22
IN
IndiaNational + states
 13today13 privacy claims · MeitY drafting rules 616 Apr6 AI claims · MeitY advisory 313 Apr3 cyber claims · CERT-In — 8today8 consultations · DPDPA rules — — 30
EU 27 Implementation Tracker

Member State implementation status

Designated authorities, transposition status, and national derogations across the three pillars of EU digital regulation. Each cell links to the responsible body or quotes the operative provision; click a Member State name for the full per-jurisdiction page. Drawn from EU Implementation table (Airtable) and refreshed as PAI Research Team verifies each cell.

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — designated authorities and national framework
● 2 Designated ◐ 24 Proposed ○ 70 Not yet ⏳ 66 Pending across 162 cells (27 MS × 6 columns)
Member State
Market Surveillance
0/27 designated or proposed
Notifying Authority
0/27 designated or proposed
Fundamental Rights (Art 77)
1/27 designated or proposed
Regulatory Sandbox
25/27 designated or proposed
Penalties Framework
0/27 designated or proposed
National AI Law
0/27 designated or proposed
Austria○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Belgium○Not yet○Not yet●SPF◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Bulgaria○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Croatia○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Cyprus○Not yet⏳Pending○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Czech Republic○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Denmark○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Estonia○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Finland○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
France○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐CNIL⏳Pending⏳Pending
Germany○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Greece○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Hungary○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Ireland○Not yet⏳Pending⏳Pending○Not yet⏳Pending⏳Pending
Italy○Not yet⏳Pending⏳Pending◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Latvia○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Lithuania○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Luxembourg⏳Pending⏳Pending○Not yet○Not yet⏳Pending⏳Pending
Malta○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Netherlands○Not yet○Not yet⏳Pending◐AP⏳Pending⏳Pending
Poland○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Portugal○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Romania○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Slovakia○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Slovenia⏳Pending⏳Pending○Not yet◐Proposed⏳Pending⏳Pending
Spain⏳Pending⏳Pending○Not yet●In force⏳Pending⏳Pending
Sweden○Not yet○Not yet○Not yet◐IMY⏳Pending⏳Pending
Directive (EU) 2022/2555 — transposition and competent authorities
● 3 Designated ⏳ 132 Pending across 135 cells (27 MS × 5 columns)
Member State
Transposition
3/27 designated or proposed
Competent Authority
0/27 designated or proposed
Single Point of Contact
0/27 designated or proposed
CSIRT
0/27 designated or proposed
National Cyber Strategy
0/27 designated or proposed
Austria⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Belgium⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Bulgaria⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Croatia⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Cyprus⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Czech Republic⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Denmark⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Estonia⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Finland⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
France⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Germany●NIS⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Greece⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Hungary⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Ireland⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Italy●ACN⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Latvia⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Lithuania⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Luxembourg⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Malta⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Netherlands⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Poland⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Portugal⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Romania⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Slovakia⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Slovenia⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Spain⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Sweden●SFS⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 — supervisory authorities and national derogations
● 27 Designated ⏳ 108 Pending across 135 cells (27 MS × 5 columns)
Member State
Supervisory Authority
27/27 designated or proposed
Lead Authority
0/27 designated or proposed
National Implementing Law
0/27 designated or proposed
DPIA Mandatory List
0/27 designated or proposed
Breach Reporting Rules
0/27 designated or proposed
Austria●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Belgium●APD-GBA⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Bulgaria●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Croatia●AZOP⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Cyprus●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Czech Republic●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Denmark●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Estonia●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Finland●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
France●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Germany●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Greece●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Hungary●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Ireland●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Italy●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Latvia●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Lithuania●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Luxembourg●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Malta●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Netherlands●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Poland●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Portugal●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Romania●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Slovakia●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Slovenia●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Spain●AEPD⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
Sweden●GDPR⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending⏳Pending
● Designated ◐ Proposed ○ Not yet ⚠ Infringement ◇ N/A ⏳ Pending verification
Why are some cells empty? Coverage is live from each body's tracking-start date (from 1 Jan 2025 onward for most). An em-dash means no verified claim has yet been captured at that intersection — not that the topic is inactive. Use the Activity filter on a jurisdiction page to see what that jurisdiction's bodies are currently publishing on.