Does AI-generated content enjoy copyright protection?

Not automatically. Dutch copyright law requires a human author. Fully autonomously generated AI content, without creative direction from a human being, is in principle not eligible for protection. If you use AI as a tool and make conscious creative choices yourself, provide prompts and edit the result, copyright can arise and vest in you. The greater the human creative input, the stronger your position. The exact boundaries are still very much developing. You can read more about this, including whether prompts themselves can be protected, on our page about AI and copyright .

Who holds the copyright if I use AI for my film?

If you direct the AI, take the creative decisions and edit the result, you can in principle claim the copyright in the end result. But this is not a given. So document your working process: which choices did you make, which tool did you use and how? That documentation is essential if a dispute arises later on with a distributor, insurer or third party.

Can I get errors and omissions insurance for a film containing AI content?

At present that is still uncertain. Insurers are still finding their way when it comes to AI-generated content. Some refuse cover for AI elements, others impose additional requirements on the documentation. So during the production stage, record carefully how AI has been used and which rights you are claiming. The better your file, the greater the chance of full insurance cover.

What is a chain of title and how does it work with AI-generated content?

A chain of title is an overview of all the rights - from script to music - that have been acquired and transferred for a film. Distributors and broadcasters require this as standard. With AI-generated content the chain of title is harder to make watertight, because it may be unclear who holds the rights. Practical advice: for each AI element, record which tool you used, what the licence terms are and which human creative choices preceded it.

Can I simply use an AI tool trained on existing films and music?

Not without more. AI systems are trained on existing content, and where that content is protected by copyright, use of the AI output can indirectly amount to an infringement - particularly with music and visual styles that appear recognisably similar to existing work. Several court cases on this are currently pending in Europe and the United States. Always check the terms of use of the AI tool and which rights you obtain as a user in the generated output.

What should I arrange contractually if I use AI on a film production?

In contracts with screenwriters, actors and other creatives, record expressly how AI will or will not be used. After the Hollywood strikes of 2023, American collective agreements already contain concrete AI provisions. In Europe that attention is growing fast. Build in reservations for AI use as well, document your production process and check the licence terms of the tools you use. That way you protect both yourself and the people you work with.

Does the AI Act affect film productions?

Yes, indirectly it does. The AI Act is entering into force in stages and imposes transparency requirements on providers of AI systems. For film producers this means being more deliberate about which AI tools you use and whether those tools comply with the new rules. Waiting for final legislation is not a strategy if you are going into production now. A sound contractual foundation is already the best protection.

AI-generated content in film: the legal aspects

Artificial intelligence is playing a growing role in film productions, from generating scripts and visual effects to creating background music. This raises new legal questions about copyright, clearances and liability.

Suppose you make a short film and use AI for the script, the visual effects and the music. The production is finished, the distributor is interested, and only then does the real work begin. Because who holds the copyright in the AI output? And how do you demonstrate to an errors and omissions insurer that all the rights are in order?

These are no longer hypothetical questions. As film law lawyers we see them come up more and more often in practice, and the answers are anything but obvious.

Copyright in AI content: who owns the output?

The core question is who holds the copyright in content generated by AI. Dutch copyright law requires a human author. A wholly autonomously generated AI script or AI image may not qualify for copyright protection. Where AI is used as a tool under a person’s creative direction, copyright can vest in that person. But it is rarely that simple. The boundaries have not yet crystallised.

In practice AI is almost always used as a tool: you give prompts, make deliberate creative choices, select and edit. The greater your creative input, the greater the chance of copyright vesting in you. Exactly where the line falls is still very much in development. Courts in Europe and the United States are already grappling with it, and the outcomes differ.

What does this mean for you as a filmmaker? Document your working process. Which creative decisions did you make? Which AI tool did you use, and how? That documentation can make the difference if a dispute arises later.

AI in your chain of title: how do you record it?

Distributors and broadcasters ask as a matter of course for a watertight chain of title: an overview of who acquired and transferred which rights. For traditional content that is a familiar exercise. For AI-generated content the ground rules are still being worked out.

Insurers writing errors and omissions policies are wrestling with the same question. To obtain errors and omissions insurance you have to be able to demonstrate that all the rights are in order. Some still refuse cover for AI elements, others impose additional requirements. If you do not address these questions during production, you risk distribution stalling later.

Practical advice: record during the production phase how AI was used:

which human creative choices were made
what licence terms the tools used impose
which rights you claim as a user.

Not every AI platform automatically gives you the rights in the output, so check the terms and conditions as well.

Rights in AI training data

AI systems are trained on existing content: films, music, photographs, texts. Where that training data is protected by copyright, the question is whether using the AI output amounts to indirect infringement. The issue is sharpest with AI-generated music and visual effects that bear a recognisable resemblance to existing work. Several court cases on this are under way in the United States and Europe. The outcome may have direct consequences for content now in production.

Collective agreements and industry arrangements on AI

Following the Hollywood strikes of 2023, American collective agreements contain new provisions on the use of AI. In Europe too, attention from unions and guilds is growing. In collaborations with screenwriters, actors and other creatives, take account of these arrangements and record expressly in contracts how AI is or is not used.

Practice areas

Roland Wigman

Lawyer

Roland knows everything about film law and film copyright. After a brief career as a film producer, he has been assisting film producers, film financiers, film distributors and creators for more than 35 years. Both nationally and internationally.

Merel Teunissen

Lawyer

Merel advises and litigates in the fields of media law, film law, copyright, privacy law, contract law and intellectual property law. She acts for established and emerging media personalities, producers in film, television and podcasts, victims of unlawful publications and creative entrepreneurs.

Frequently asked questions about AI-generated content in film

Not automatically. Dutch copyright law requires a human author. Fully autonomously generated AI content, without creative direction from a human being, is in principle not eligible for protection. If you use AI as a tool and make conscious creative choices yourself, provide prompts and edit the result, copyright can arise and vest in you. The greater the human creative input, the stronger your position. The exact boundaries are still very much developing. You can read more about this, including whether prompts themselves can be protected, on our page about AI and copyright.
At present that is still uncertain. Insurers are still finding their way when it comes to AI-generated content. Some refuse cover for AI elements, others impose additional requirements on the documentation. So during the production stage, record carefully how AI has been used and which rights you are claiming. The better your file, the greater the chance of full insurance cover.
A chain of title is an overview of all the rights - from script to music - that have been acquired and transferred for a film. Distributors and broadcasters require this as standard. With AI-generated content the chain of title is harder to make watertight, because it may be unclear who holds the rights. Practical advice: for each AI element, record which tool you used, what the licence terms are and which human creative choices preceded it.
Not without more. AI systems are trained on existing content, and where that content is protected by copyright, use of the AI output can indirectly amount to an infringement - particularly with music and visual styles that appear recognisably similar to existing work. Several court cases on this are currently pending in Europe and the United States. Always check the terms of use of the AI tool and which rights you obtain as a user in the generated output.
In contracts with screenwriters, actors and other creatives, record expressly how AI will or will not be used. After the Hollywood strikes of 2023, American collective agreements already contain concrete AI provisions. In Europe that attention is growing fast. Build in reservations for AI use as well, document your production process and check the licence terms of the tools you use. That way you protect both yourself and the people you work with.
Yes, indirectly it does. The AI Act is entering into force in stages and imposes transparency requirements on providers of AI systems. For film producers this means being more deliberate about which AI tools you use and whether those tools comply with the new rules. Waiting for final legislation is not a strategy if you are going into production now. A sound contractual foundation is already the best protection.