Frameworks · Per-jurisdiction note · IP & AI
United States: IP & AI
All six IP & AI claims for this jurisdiction, with the original source for each completed cell. Editor: David Longford.
Copyright · Claim 1
AI-Only Works · Copyrightability
Are works generated solely by AI (no human creative contribution) eligible for copyright protection in this jurisdiction?
No Source-confirmed
Source citation: Zarya of the Dawn (US Copyright Office, 21 Feb 2023)
US Copyright Office, Zarya of the Dawn (21 Feb 2023), p.1: AI-generated images "are not the product of human authorship."
View source → www.copyright.gov
Verification: Direct pdfplumber read of copyright.gov PDF; 'not the product of human authorship' quote at p.1
Copyright · Claim 2
AI-Only Works · Authorship
When a work is generated solely by AI, does the law name a human or legal person as the author — and if so, who?
No Source-confirmed
Source citation: Thaler v Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 18 Mar 2025)
Thaler v Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 18 Mar 2025): "The Copyright Act of 1976 requires all eligible work to be authored in the first instance by a human being."
View source → www.courtlistener.com
Verification: Playwright/courtlistener opinion 10357586 verbatim: 'The Copyright Act of 1976 requires all eligible work to be authored in the first instance by a human being.'
Training Data · Claim 3
Non-Commercial TDM · Research
Can researchers perform text-and-data mining on copyrighted works without a licence for scientific or non-commercial purposes?
Unsettled Source-confirmed (fair use text) + Editorial (no statutory TDM exception)
Source citation: 17 U.S.C. § 107 (general fair use)
17 U.S.C. § 107: 4-factor fair-use test. There is no statutory TDM exception in US copyright law.
View source → www.law.cornell.edu
Verification: Cornell LII raw read: 4-factor fair use verbatim; no statutory TDM exception, fact-by-fact balancing
Training Data · Claim 4
Commercial TDM · AI Training
Can commercial actors (including AI developers) train models on copyrighted works without a licence, subject to opt-out or any other limit?
Unsettled Editorial
Source citation: 17 U.S.C. § 107 (fact-by-fact fair use; multiple pending suits)
No statutory TDM. Whether commercial AI training is fair use is the subject of multiple pending federal lawsuits (NYT v OpenAI, Authors Guild v OpenAI, Bartz v Anthropic, Kadrey v Meta).
View source → www.law.cornell.edu
Verification: No statutory TDM; commercial AI training is the subject of NYT v OpenAI, Authors Guild v OpenAI, Bartz v Anthropic, Kadrey v Meta and other pending federal litigation
Patents · Claim 5
AI as Inventor
Can an AI system be designated as the inventor on a patent application in this jurisdiction?
No Source-confirmed
Source citation: Thaler v Vidal, 43 F.4th 1207, No. 21-2347 (Fed. Cir. 5 Aug 2022)
Thaler v Vidal, 43 F.4th 1207 (Fed. Cir. 5 Aug 2022, No. 21-2347), Stark, J. — verbatim from CAFC opinion PDF: p.5 "Here, there is no ambiguity: the Patent Act requires that inventors must be natural persons; that is, human beings." p.6 quoting 35 U.S.C. § 100(f): "the individual or, if a joint invention, the individuals collectively who invented or discovered the subject matter of the invention." Final disposition p.11: "Congress has determined that only a natural person can be an inventor, so AI cannot be. Accordingly, the decision of the district court is affirmed."
View source → cafc.uscourts.gov
Verification: CAFC PDF (cafc.uscourts.gov, Document 60) verbatim p.5: 'Here, there is no ambiguity: the Patent Act requires that inventors must be natural persons; that is, human beings.' Final disposition p.11: 'Congress has determined that only a natural person can be an inventor, so AI cannot be.'
Patents · Claim 6
AI-Assisted Inventorship
When an AI system contributes materially to an invention, does the law require a human inventor and how is contribution-by-AI treated?
Unsettled Editorial
Source citation: (post-Thaler v Vidal — open question)
Thaler v Vidal (Fed. Cir. 5 Aug 2022) p.10 verbatim caveat: "we are not confronted today with the question of whether inventions made by human beings with the assistance of AI are eligible for patent protection." Federal Circuit therefore expressly left AI-assisted inventorship open. USPTO February 2024 guidance addresses it administratively but is not binding case law.
View source → cafc.uscourts.gov
Verification: Federal Circuit in Thaler v Vidal left AI-as-tool inventorship unresolved; USPTO Feb 2024 guidance addresses it administratively
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 matrixClaims captured in the last 30 days, by jurisdiction and topic. Click to reveal.Show →
Claim coverage · Jurisdiction × topic matrix
Claims captured in the last 30 days, by jurisdiction and topic. Click to reveal.
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.
| 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.
