Copyright Laws And Regulations Canada 2026

1. Copyright Subsistence

1.1 What are the requirements for copyright to subsist in a work?

The Canadian Copyright Act (the "Act") grants protection to any published or unpublished original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic work, as well as any compilation of the foregoing, and to performers' performances, sound recordings and communication signals. The copyright protection occurs as soon as the work is created and fixed into a material form of expression or a performers' performance occurs. What constitutes originality is determined by a test articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada which requires the author or performer to exercise skill and judgment in a manner that is not a purely mechanical exercise. Skill is interpreted as meaning the use of one's knowledge, developed aptitude or practised ability in producing the work, while judgment means the use of one's capacity for discernment or ability to form an opinion or evaluation by comparing different possible options in producing the work.

1.2 Does your jurisdiction operate an open or closed list of works that can qualify for copyright protection?

The Canadian copyright system operates to provide protection to specific categories of works and performers' performances, as set out in question 1.3. The list of works and performers' performances within those categories is non-exhaustive.

1.3 In what works can copyright subsist?

Under the Canadian Copyright Act and jurisprudence, copyright may subsist in works and performers' performances.

Works include any literary, dramatic, artistic, or musical work. These four categories are broadly defined and have been interpreted to capture a wide range of subject matter. As some examples:

1. literary works include written works of a variety of types, such as books or computer programs;
2. dramatic works include plays, screenplays, choreographic works, and cinematographic works;
3. musical works include any work of music or musical composition, with or without words; and
4. artistic works include a variety of forms, such as paintings, drawings, maps, photographs, sculptures, engravings, works of artistic craftsmanship, and architectural works.

Copyright protection is further granted to compilations (a work resulting from the selection or arrangement of literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic works or data) and collective works (encyclopedias, dictionaries, yearbooks, newspapers, reviews, magazines, periodicals, or any work written in distinct parts by different authors, or in which works or parts of works of different authors are incorporated). The protection therefor extends not just to the underlying works or data but to the author's original skill and judgment in arranging or selecting them.

A performer's performance can be fixed or unfixed. Copyright further can protect sound recordings, and broadcasters' communication signals.

1.4 Are there any works which are excluded from copyright protection?

Copyright in Canada protects the expression of ideas but not the underlying ideas, concepts, opinions, procedures, methods of operation, or mathematical concepts themselves. These are excluded to preserve the free flow of knowledge and ensure that copyright does not function as a monopoly over information.

Similarly, facts are not protected by copyright, although a creative selection or arrangement of facts may be protected as a compilation.

As copyright protection for works requires fixation in a material form, works that are not recorded in some tangible medium are excluded from copyright protection as a work.

In general, copyright safeguards the original expression of an author's skill and judgment, while leaving raw information, unexpressed ideas and routine mechanical products outside its scope.

Additionally, copyright may not be enforceable in designs applied to useful articles where 50 or more copies of the article are reproduced. See question 1.7 for more details.

1.5 Is there a system for registration of copyright and, if so, what is the effect of registration?

Registration is not a prerequisite for copyright protection, but there is a process for voluntary registration administered by the Canadian Copyright Office. Copyright registration can serve as: (i) notice to the public as to the existence of the copyright; and (ii) prima facie evidence of ownership of the copyright, which can simplify the evidentiary burden in a copyright litigation proceeding for the copyright owner.

1.6 What is the duration of copyright protection? Does this vary depending on the type of work?

The term of copyright protection under the Act depends upon the nature of the work or performers' performance.

As of 2022, the term of copyright protection for works was extended to the life of the author of a work plus a period of 70 years after their death (or after the death of the last author to die plus 70 years if there are co-authors).

If the identity of the author of a work is unknown, then the copyright term is 75 years following the year in which the work was originally made. If that work is then published before the copyright expires, the copyright continues until the earlier of 75 years after the year of publication or 100 years following the year in which the work was made.

Any works that are prepared or published under the direction or control of the Crown belong to the Crown and exist for a period of 50 years following the year of publication.

The copyright term for a sound recording is 70 years after it was recorded or, if published during that time, the earlier of 75 years from the year of the first publication or 100 years from the year the sound recording was made.

For performer's performances, the copyright protection subsists for 50 years after the year the performance occurs, or if the performance is fixed on a sound recording, 70 years from the year of fixation. If that sound recording is then published during the term, the copyright lasts for the earlier of 75 years after the year of publication or 100 years after the year of fixation.

Copyright protection for communication signals lasts for a term of 50 years after the year in which the signal was broadcasted.

The term of copyright protection for cinematographic works (excepting cinematographic works in which the arrangement or acting form or combination of incidents represented give the work a dramatic character) copyright protection lasts for 70 years after the year in which the work was created or, if published, the earlier of 75 years from the year of publication or 100 years from the year in which the work was created.

1.7 Is there any overlap between copyright and other intellectual property rights such as design rights and database rights?

The Canadian Supreme Court in the Kirkbi AG v. Ritvik Holdings Inc. case held that Canadian intellectual property rights are each distinct from the other rights.

Copyright has a relationship to industrial design rights and trademarks, but provides a protection that is distinct from industrial designs and trademarks.

Industrial design rights protect the aesthetics of a design that is applied to an article, such as its shape, configuration, pattern or ornamentation. Trademarks protect marks used in association with goods and services.

An example of the distinction between the rights, is that a trademark that is a logo may be protected by both trademark rights and copyright. The use of the logo in association with goods and services would be protected by trademark, and the design of the logo itself may be protected by copyright. Another example is that artistic drawings of a chair design may be protected by copyright, while the design applied to the chair itself may be protected as an industrial design.

Furthermore, there is a line drawn in the Act between industrial design rights and copyright, in that where copyright subsists in a design applied to a useful article and the article is reproduced in a quantity of more than fifty, the copyright owner's right to claim infringement of their copyright are lost. The owner would only be able to claim infringement of the design under the Industrial Design Act (with some limited exceptions).

1.8 Are there any restrictions on the protection for copyright works which are made by an industrial process?

As discussed in question 1.1, copyright requires the exercise of skill and judgment. Purely mechanical works, meaning those produced through automatic or routine processes such as an alphabetised telephone directory would not meet this threshold.

Furthermore, as discussed in question 1.7, designs applied to articles of which 50 or more copies are produced, cannot be protected against infringement under the Act.

1.9 Would Copyright subsist in a work which is created by a Generative AI tool?

Currently, purely AI generated works are not provided copyright protection in Canada. While no case law has explored this issue in the AI context, as discussed in question 1.1 above, to be afforded copyright in Canada the work must display sufficient skill and judgment. In addition, while author is not defined in the Act, current jurisprudence suggests that authorship must be attributed to a natural person. On the other hand, it is more likely that a work developed by a human author using AI as a tool would be afforded copyright in Canada. In 2021, a copyright registration created using AI as a tool was granted copyright registration in Canada; however it should be noted that the Canadian Copyright Office does not substantively review applications for compliance, and this registration is currently being challenged. Further, a recent consultation conducted by the Government of Canada concluded that while there was support for allowing authors to use AI as a tool in their creation, there was widespread agreement that human authorship should remain key to copyright protection with little support for granting protection to works created solely through generative AI.

2. Ownership

2.1 Who is the first owner of copyright in each of the works protected (other than where questions 2.2 or 2.3 apply)?

Generally, under the Act, the first owner of copyright is the author of the original work. There are some exceptions to this:

• For an original work that is authored by an employee in the course of their employment the employer will be deemed to be the first owner of copyright.
• The first owner of a sound recording is the "maker", who is the person by whom the arrangements necessary for the first fixation of the sounds are undertaken.
• Any works created by or under the direction and control of the Crown are initially vested in the Crown.

2.2 Where a work is commissioned, how is ownership of the copyright determined between the author and the commissioner?

In Canada, commissioning a work does not automatically transfer the copyright to the commissioner. The author remains the first owner of copyright, unless there is a written agreement assigning copyright to the commissioner. However, commissioners may obtain an implied licence to use the work for the purpose for which it was commissioned.

2.3 Where a work is computer-generated (whether or not using AI), who is the first owner of copyright?

The Act does not contain a distinct provision addressing AI-generated or computer-generated works. As discussed in question 2.1, in order to be granted copyright protection a work must be original, meaning that it is the product of the author's skill and judgment. Therefore, computer-generated works may not meet the criteria for copyright protection. At present, the question as to whether purely computer-generated works can be protected by copyright remains unsettled in Canadian law (see question 1.9 for more details).

2.4 Is there a concept of joint ownership and, if so, what rules apply to dealings with a jointly owned work?

Canadian copyright law recognises joint authorship of a work. Jointly owned works are those produced by the collaboration of two or more authors in which the contribution of one author is not distinct from the contribution of the other author(s). Joint owners are generally considered to hold the copyright as tenants-in-common. Unless there is a contract to the contrary, each joint owner is entitled to exploit the work and to receive a fair share of the benefits. An assignment or licence of the jointly-owned copyright requires the consent of all joint owners, since such dealings affect the rights of the others. As discussed in question 1.6, the term of jointly-owned copyright will extend for 70 years from the death of the last author of the work.

3. Exploitation

3.1 Are there any formalities which apply to the transfer/assignment of ownership?

An assignment of the copyright in any work must be in writing and signed by the copyright owner or their duly authorised agent. The Copyright Office will not recognise any owner of copyright of which it has no notice. Copyright assignments should therefore be recorded with the Canadian Trademark Office, to secure rights against a later assignee.

3.2 Are there any formalities required for a copyright licence?

A licence that grants an interest in a copyright (e.g., an exclusive licence) must be in writing and signed by the owner of the copyright or their duly authorised agent. Copyright licences can be recorded with the Copyright office. A licence that merely permits actions by the licensee that would otherwise be infringements (e.g., a non-exclusive licence) need not be in writing.

3.3 Are there any laws which limit the licence terms parties may agree to (other than as addressed in questions 3.4 to 3.6)?

The Act generally does not permit an author to assign or grant an interest in their copyrighted works for the full term of the copyright, unless covered by the author's will. Where the author of a work is the first owner of the copyright therein, any rights therein assigned or granted by the author to an assignee will automatically revert to the author's estate upon the expiration of 25 years from the death of the author.

3.4 Which types of copyright work have collective licensing bodies (please name the relevant bodies)?

The Copyright Board maintains a list of the Collective Societies and the types of works to which their royalty collection and/or licensing regimes apply. Some prevalent Collective Societies in Canada include:

• Access Copyright, which represents writers, visual artists and publishers for works published in books, magazines, journals and newspapers;
• the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers ("SOCAN"), which administers public performance, telecommunication and reproduction rights in musical works for composers, authors and publishers;
• the Canadian Musical Reproduction Rights Agency ("CMRRA"), which licenses reproduction rights, including synchronisation rights, in musical works for music publishers;
• CONNECT Music Licensing, which licenses the reproduction of sound recordings and the reproduction and broadcast of music videos on behalf of record companies, producers and artists;
• the Re:Sound Music Licensing Company, which collects royalties for performing artists and record companies concerning their performance rights; and
• the ACTRA Performing Rights Society ("ACTRA PRS"), which collects royalties for recording artists.

3.5 Where there are collective licensing bodies, how are they regulated?

The setting of tariffs by Collective Societies is overseen by the Canadian Copyright Board (the "Board"), an administrative tribunal created under the Act. Certain types of tariffs are required to be submitted to and approved by the Board prior to taking effect. Submission to the Board is optional for many tariffs where the Collective Society and its users are free to independently agree to terms. However, in the event a Collective Society and its users cannot privately agree, either party may request Board intervention to set royalties or related terms and conditions.

3.6 On what grounds can licence terms offered by a collective licensing body be challenged?

The Board has broad authority to vary the terms of a tariff proposed by a Collective Society. A tariff can be challenged, for example, on the basis that the Collective Society does not have authority to authorise the uses covered by the proposed tariff, objections to proposed rates or a rate structure, or the feasibility or cost of complying with the proposed terms.

4. Owners' Rights

4.1 What acts involving a copyright work are capable of being restricted by the rights holder?

Under the Act, the rights holder enjoys the sole right to produce, reproduce, perform or publish the work or any substantial part thereof, in any material form. It also includes the right to communicate the work to the public by telecommunication, to create translations, adaptations or derivative works, rent out a computer program or sound recording, make the work available online to the public, and to authorise others to exercise these rights.

The Act extends similar protections to other subject matter including performers' performances, a maker's sound recordings, and communication signals.

In addition, the Act prohibits the circumvention of technological protection measures designed to restrict unauthorised access or copyright, as well as the removal or alteration of electronic rights management information.

4.2 Are there any ancillary rights related to copyright, such as moral rights, and, if so, what do they protect, and can they be waived or assigned?

Canadian copyright law grants authors and performers moral rights in works and performers' performances. If the author or performer dies before the end of the copyright term, moral rights are bequeathed to their heirs. Moral rights are personal to the author or performer and cannot be assigned but may be waived in whole or in part.

Moral rights include rights of: attribution (to be associated with the work by name, pseudonym, or to remain anonymous), integrity (to object to modifications, distortions or mutilations of the work that prejudice the author's honour or reputation), and association (to prevent the work from being used in association with a product, service, cause or institution to the author's prejudice).

The remedies for moral rights infringement mirror those available for copyright infringement, including damages, injunctions and delivery up of infringing copies. This framework ensures that authors retain a measure of control over the personal and reputational aspects of their creations, even when copyright in the work or performance has been assigned.

4.3 Are there circumstances in which a copyright owner is unable to restrain subsequent dealings in works which have been put on the market with his consent?

Canada follows the principle of exhaustion of rights. Once a copyright owner has sold or otherwise transferred a lawfully made copy of a work, they cannot prevent the purchaser from reselling, lending or otherwise dealing with that particular copy. However, the purchaser does not acquire the right to reproduce, adapt or create derivative works. The exhaustion applies only to the distribution of the specific copy sold.

The Act also contains a series of user rights and exceptions to copyright infringement, such as fair dealing for research, private study, education, parody, and satire. These user rights and exceptions also limit the copyright owner's ability to restrain certain copyright dealings.

5. Copyright Enforcement

5.1 Are there any statutory enforcement agencies and, if so, are they used by rights holders as an alternative to civil actions?

There are no such Canadian agencies.

5.2 Other than the copyright owner, can anyone else bring a claim for infringement of the copyright in a work?

In addition to owners:

• holders of exclusive licences in copyright can bring a claim for infringement;
• an "exclusive distributor" of a book can bring certain claims relating to unauthorised importation of books printed in a foreign country; and
• the Crown can bring claims in relation to criminal copyright offences.

5.3 Can an action be brought against 'secondary' infringers as well as primary infringers and, if so, on what basis can someone be liable for secondary infringement?

It is an act of secondary infringement of copyright under Canadian laws for any person to (a) sell or rent out, (b) distribute to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright, (c) by way of trade distribute, expose or offer for sale or rental, or exhibit in public, (d) possess for the purpose of doing anything referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c), or (e) import into Canada for the purpose of doing anything referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c), a copy of a work, sound recording or fixation of a performer's performance or of a communication signal that the person knows or should have known infringes copyright or would infringe copyright if it had been made in Canada by the person who made it.

5.4 Are there any general or specific exceptions which can be relied upon as a defence to a claim of infringement?

As a defence to a claim of infringement, an alleged infringer can try to demonstrate that: their work was an independent original creation; the asserted copyright is invalid; and/or that the owner of the copyright has consented to the use of the work. An alleged infringer may also raise one or more of the statutory defences provided for in the Act, as follows:

• Fair dealing provides an exemption from copyright infringement for uses of a copyright work or performers' performance for the purpose of research or private study, criticism, review, or news reporting. Canadian courts apply a two-part test to determine whether the copying falls within the fair dealing provisions: (i) whether the use was for one of the purposes enumerated in the Act; and (ii) whether the manner of use was fair. Courts review the following factors to assess whether a use was fair: (a) the purpose of the use; (b) the nature of the use (commercial v. non-commercial); (c) the scope of the use (amount copied, how many copies made); (d) alternatives to the use; (e) the nature of the work; and (f) the effect of the use on the market for the copied work.
• Incidental, non-deliberate inclusion is deemed not to infringe copyright.
• Specific uses of works by educational institutions, libraries, archives, museums, religious organisations and charities are non-infringing.
• Non-commercial and personal uses of works by individuals, including for time-shifting purposes, transferring from one media to another, creating online user-generated content which contains third-party works without any motive of gain, and making additional copies of computer programs for back-up purposes or to make the program compatible with another program are exceptions to copyright infringement.

5.5 Are interim or permanent injunctions available?

Canadian rules relating to interlocutory and permanent injunctions apply to copyright infringement cases in the same manner as other injunction cases. In accordance with the test for interlocutory injunctions articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in the RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada case, it must be shown that: (1) there is a serious question to be tried; and (2) irreparable harm would arise if an injunction were not issued. Additionally, the court must determine, on a balance of convenience, which party would suffer the greater harm by ordering or refusing the injunction.

To obtain a permanent injunction, the copyright holder must establish: (1) an infringement of rights based on a final adjudication of the claimed rights; (2) that damages or other alternative remedies are not sufficient or adequate to address the wrongful conduct; and (3) that there is no impediment to the court's discretion to grant an injunction.

5.6 On what basis are damages or an account of profits calculated?

Under Canadian laws an infringer must pay the damages the copyright holder suffered due to infringement and must also pay part of the profits it derived from the infringement, as the court considers just. As evidence of profits, the plaintiff is only required to prove the receipts or revenues derived from the infringement. The defendant must prove every element of costs that the defendant claims.

Aggravated damages may be awarded in addition to damages for injury to reputation, as may punitive and exemplary damages.

As an alternative to proving damages, a plaintiff can elect to receive statutory damages at any time prior to a final judgment. The Act sets out statutory damages that differ in accordance with whether the infringement is of a commercial nature or not, and all damages are applicable at the court's discretion. For infringements of a commercial nature, statutory damages range from CAD 500 to CAD 20,000 for each work. For non-commercial infringement, statutory damages range from CAD 100 to CAD 5,000 for each work.

The court has the ability to reduce statutory damage awards under certain circumstances, including in claims for unpaid royalties.

5.7 What are the typical costs of infringement proceedings and how long do they take?

Canadian enforcement costs can vary based on multiple factors, including complexity of issues and the number of motions or other interlocutory steps that arise during the litigation. Most Canadian copyright cases are settled between the parties.

The duration of copyright litigation proceedings can vary based on multiple factors. On average, bringing a copyright case to trial can take over two years. Courts hold periodic status reviews to advance proceedings, but frequently the various stages of litigation and a trial still extend over multiple years.

5.8 Is there a right of appeal from a first instance judgment and, if so, what are the grounds on which an appeal may be brought?

Appeals can be raised in Canada to challenge final copyright adjudications, judgments on a question of law or interlocutory injunctions. The Act is a federal law and therefore appeals of claims at the Federal Court level are made to the Federal Court of Appeal, pending leave from the Federal Court.

5.9 What is the period in which an action must be commenced?

A Canadian action must be commenced within three years of the time when the plaintiff knew or would reasonably have been expected to know that the copyright infringement took place. However, each infringing act is considered to be a new infringement with a distinct three-year limitation period.

6. Criminal Offences

6.1 Are there any criminal offences relating to copyright infringement?

Canadian copyright laws set out several criminal offences. It is a criminal offence to knowingly: (a) make an infringing copy of a work for sale or rental; (b) sell, rent or offer for sale or rent an infringing copy of a work; (c) distribute infringing copies of a work for the purpose of trade or to such an extent as to prejudice the copyright owner; (d) by way of trade exhibit in public an infringing copy of a work; (e) possess an infringing copy of a work for sale, rental or distribution for the purpose of trade or exhibition in public; (f) import an infringing copy of a work into Canada for sale or rental; (g) export or attempt to export an infringing copy of a work for sale or rental; (h) make or posses any plate that is specifically designed or adapted for the purpose of making infringing copies; and (i) cause a work to be performed in public for private profit without the consent of the copyright owner.

6.2 What is the threshold for criminal liability and what are the potential sanctions?

For criminal liability to be applicable in Canada, the copyright infringer must have acted with knowledge that their acts constituted infringement. A defendant who is found guilty of an offence is liable on: (i) summary conviction to a fine not exceeding CAD 25,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or both; or (ii) conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding CAD 1,000,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both.

7. Current Developments

7.1 Have there been, or are there anticipated, any significant legislative changes or case law developments?

Canada has made significant amendments to the Act, particularly in relation to technological protection measures ("TPMs"). The most notable legislative developments were introduced as Bill C-244 and Bill C-294, both of which received royal assent on 7 November 2024 and are now incorporated in the Act.

• Bill C-244 permits circumvention of TPMs for the limited purpose of diagnosing, maintaining or repairing a product through recognition of a "right to repair" exception that is reflected in amendments to the definitions of "technical protection measure" and "circumvent" that clarify the scope of the exception as applicable to computer programs embedded in devices.
• Bill C-294 complements the reforms of Bill C-244 by permitting individuals and businesses to circumvention of TPMs for interoperability purposes for the purpose of making a lawfully obtained program or device compatible with other devices, components or programs. This exception is narrowly confined to interoperability and does not permit the reproduction or exploitation of copyrighted expression beyond what is necessary to achieve compatibility.

Together these amendments to the Act represent modernisation that addresses situations relating to digital ecosystems whereby TPMs might otherwise inhibit repair and innovation.

Recent Canadian jurisprudence includes a decision by the Federal Court of Appeal in the Voltage Pictures v. Robert Salna case that provides commentary regarding how not to pursue copyright infringement claims in reverse class action proceedings. The facts of the case include that Voltage's copyright in five films was alleged to be infringed when the films were downloaded and made available via an online peer-to-peer sharing platform (BitTorrent). Voltage sought to use reverse class proceedings to pursue copyright claims against multiple alleged infringers whose IP addresses Voltage had identified. The court rejected Voltage's proposal to use the Act's notice-and-notice regime to provide notice of the proceedings to account holders associated with the identified IP addresses. The notice-and-notice regime of the Act requires ISPs to forward "notices of claimed infringement" to account holders. The court held that the express prohibition in the Act for demands for payment and offers to settle in such notices precluded Voltage's proposed use of the regime.

Another recent set of cases may make it easier for rights holders to stop online infringement of live event broadcasts:

• Rogers Media Inc. v. John Doe 1, 2022 FC 775 the Federal Court issued an interlocutory "dynamic" site-blocking order directing ISPs to block certain IP addresses identified as hosting unauthorised streams in real time during NHL matches for the 2001-2022 season.
• Rogers Media Inc. v. John Doe, 2024 FC 1082 the court permanently enjoined the anonymous infringers and issued a two-year "dynamic" site blocking order that expanded the scope of live broadcasts protected and provided flexibility to include additional "Protected Live Content" in its scope going forward.

For more information on recent comments from the government of Canada on copyright and AI, see question 7.3.

7.2 Are there any particularly noteworthy issues around the application and enforcement of copyright in relation to digital content (for example, when a work is deemed to be made available to the public online, hyperlinking, in NFTs or the metaverse, etc.)?

The role of TPMs has been a central area of controversy in Canada legal circles. Following amendments to the Act in 2012, both the circumvention of TPMs and the provision of services or tools designed for circumvention have been prohibited. One key issue is how to properly balance user rights with that of the copyright owner in a digital age. In 1395804 Ontario Ltd. v Canada (Attorney General), the Federal Court examined whether the internal sharing of a subscription password by Parks Canada employees amounted to copyright infringement or circumvention of a TPM. The court held that the password was legitimately obtained and that the sharing of articles for accuracy review fell within fair dealing. Notably, the court rejected the argument that this constituted unlawful TPM circumvention, signalling that anti-circumvention provisions cannot be interpreted so broadly as to override statutory user rights.

7.3 Have there been any decisions or changes of law regarding the interaction between copyright law and the creation and deployment of artificial intelligence systems? In particular, please reference any pending (or decided) disputes where copyright owners have challenged AI developers in relation to the use of works in the development of AI tools.

Several developments involving the intersection of AI and copyright are on the horizon, but none are enacted as law as of yet in Canada.

The Act mandates a review by a committee of Parliament every five years. The last review occurred in 2019. It is expected that the next review will implement policy relevant to AI, as the Federal Government of Canada has conducted consultations with the public aimed at informing copyright policy in view of AI developments.

In an attempt to mitigate risks associated with AI while legislation and regulation consultation progresses, the Canadian government published the Voluntary Code of Conduct on Advanced Generative AI Systems (the "Code"), which provides measures aimed to promote accountability, safety, fairness and equity, transparency, human oversight and monitoring, and validity and robustness. Compliance with the Code is voluntary, and as of August 2025 there were 46 signatories. The transparency measures of the Code require that publicly facing AI system developers publish a description of the types of training data used in development.

Originally published by ICLG - Copyright Laws and Regulations, Global Legal Group.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.