[CLSTR]
< Back to situation

[REVISION HISTORY]

East Asian AI copyright policy coordination

Updated 3 times since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-09-28 22:42 UTC → 2026-10-08 04:14 UTC · added removed

East Asian nations are increasingly coordinating efforts to address copyright challenges emerging from artificial intelligence. In August 2026, the Philippines and South Korea convened a forum to discuss AI-generated music. The discussion focused on the necessity of robust digital rights management and metadata governance to protect songwriters and performers from issues such as royalty hijacking and fraud. South Korea presented its integrated music rights database as a potential model for ensuring fair remuneration. By September 2026, South Korea and Japan expanded these intergovernmental discussions to balance creator rights with AI industry growth. South Korea outlined financial plans to increase budgets for AI training data and R&D for copyright governance. Japan expressed interest in South Korea’s legal guidelines regarding fair use and noted its intention to implement a comprehensive response system to combat online infringement, similar to one utilized by South Korea in 2024. In late September 2026, South Korea intensified domestic efforts through a forum hosted by the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, the K-Music Rights Organizations Win-Win Committee, and the office of National Assembly member Kim Jae-won. This forum addressed copyright trust and registration standards for generative AI music, specifically focusing on establishing criteria for determining human creative contribution. As of late September October 2026, debates in South Korea have shifted toward practical industry rules for AI-generated music. Experts are examining whether a musician’s level of control over an has formalized its stance through new guidelines from the National Intellectual Property Commission. These guidelines establish that AI is a tool constitutes authorship, and that intellectual property rights require ‘substantial contribution’ from a human. Under these rules, AI cannot be recognized as an inventor or if selecting designer. While AI-generated phrases is merely ‘discovery’ rather than ‘creation.’ There outputs are ongoing calls not eligible for copyright registration on their own, humans may register them as ‘editorial works’ if they contribute creatively through selection, arrangement, or composition. Infringement will be determined by whether an output shows ‘access’ to include active composers in regulatory discussions existing works and possesses ‘substantial similarity’ to ensure systems support professional creators. them.

Versions

  1. 2026-10-08 04:14 UTC East Asian AI copyright policy coordination
  2. 2026-09-28 22:42 UTC East Asian AI copyright policy coordination
  3. 2026-09-21 08:03 UTC East Asian AI copyright policy coordination
  4. 2026-09-11 09:04 UTC East Asian AI copyright policy coordination

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.