Mar 19, 2026 | Hong Kong Copyright Law: Who owns the copyright to AI-generated works?

Hong Kong Copyright Law: Who owns the copyright to AI-generated works?

1. In Hong Kong, there is no single, clear answer to the question of copyright ownership for works generated by artificial intelligence (AI). Instead, it depends on two core elements: who is “the person who makes the necessary arrangements” during the creation process, and how the agreement between the user and the AI platform is stipulated.

Copyright Ordinance (Cap. 528)

2. According to the Hong Kong Copyright Ordinance, Cap. 528, copyright generally belongs to the “author” of the work. For AI-generated works, the key is to determine who the “author” is in a legal sense.

3. Section 11(3) of the ordinance specifies that if a work is generated by a computer, then “the person who made the necessary arrangements for the creation of the work” is considered the author. This means that the law does not recognize the AI itself as the author, but rather traces it back to the person who made the arrangements. Therefore, if user (A) demonstrates original intellectual input, judgment, and control by designing complex prompts for multiple iterations and substantially editing and modifying the output, then user (A) has sufficient grounds to be considered the “necessary arranger” and thus own the copyright to the work. However, there is an exception to this ordinance: contractual arrangements.

Contract terms take precedence

4. However, general legal principles are often rewritten by specific contractual terms. Many AI software company (B) explicitly stipulate in their user service agreements that the intellectual property rights of all output content generated by the platform belong to the platform (B), or grant the platform a broad, royalty-free, perpetual right of use. In judicial practice, the validity of such contractual terms usually takes precedence over legal presumptions. Therefore, even if the user (A) invests a significant amount of creative work, if the agreement explicitly assigns copyright to company B, then B is the copyright holder.

User Actions

5. Given the decisive role of contracts, carefully evaluating user agreements is paramount to avoiding legal risks. The key to determining copyright ownership often lies hidden within these lengthy legal clauses.

6. User (A) must take the following proactive measures to protect their rights and avoid infringement:

(a) First priority: Carefully review the user agreement. Before using any AI-generated tool, be sure to carefully read its terms of service, paying particular attention to sections such as “Intellectual Property,” “Ownership of Output Content,” and “Scope of Authorization.” Clearly understand what rights the platform claims and what kind of license it has granted you (personal use, commercial use, or exclusive use).
(b) To strengthen your position as a “necessary arranger,” systematically preserveevidence of the entire creation process. This includes: detailed prompt text, parameter settings, iterative results from different versions, and records of later editing modifications (such as PSD project files and modification history). This evidence can effectively prove your original contribution in the event of a dispute.
(c) Review, and even modify, AI-generated content before using it.

Conclusion

7. In conclusion, under Hong Kong’s current legal framework, the ownership of copyright for AI-generated works is a dynamic process that depends on the user’s level of creative input and binding contractual terms. The government’s decision to postpone legislative amendments after consultation in 2024 reflects its approach of relying on existing flexible legal principles and contractual mechanisms to address this issue.

8. For users, proactively managing contract risks, deepening their creative involvement, and preserving evidence are the most crucial strategies for safeguarding their creative achievements and legitimate rights.