AI's Passport Problem: How Can Media And Content Creators Navigate Fragmented Copyright Laws In A Global World?

The rapid proliferation of artificial intelligence across creative industries has sparked a cascade of legislative and judicial activity worldwide, reshaping how intellectual property is defined, created, and protected. For media and entertainment companies, content creators, and IP rightsholders, these evolving—and often conflicting—international approaches to AI and copyright present new challenges and can raise more questions than answers. How should IP holders navigate this changing legal landscape? And what strategies can artists and companies deploy to protect their content in an increasingly complex global environment?

Take Denmark's proposed move to tackle AI-generated digital replicas. The country recently saw highly publicized legislation aimed at curbing AI-generated deepfakes. The proposed law would give individuals copyright-like digital identity protection for their faces, voices, and likenesses. Meanwhile, countries like Japan and Singapore have embraced a more permissive approach to AI, amending their copyright laws to adopt AI-friendly exceptions that allow for data training without prior consent. Yet, in other jurisdictions, courts are stepping in to impose strict boundaries. Mexico's Supreme Court, for instance, recently issued a decision finding that works generated exclusively by AI are not eligible for copyright protection—but leaving unresolved questions about hybrid works with some human input. And a recent court decision in China denying copyright protection for certain AI-generated images led legal commentators to question whether China's copyright laws might be slowly aligning with U.S. standards.

These wide-ranging, and sometimes contrasting, approaches underscore the legal uncertainty over how courts and policymakers will reconcile the growing tension between innovation and IP protection worldwide. A television production team relying on AI-generated assets might find materials acceptable for use in Japan but not in Mexico or the EU. Filmmakers may encounter inconsistent likeness rights when working with Danish, Chinese, and American cast members on a single project. And with the copyright status of AI-generated contributions varied across jurisdictions, rights may become fragmented, opening the door to thorny ownership disputes. These challenges are only going to become more complex and more commonplace in today's interconnected media environment—where content is often developed, licensed, and distributed across the globe. For companies with cross-border interests, these issues pose major legal and policy challenges in areas ranging from creating content to securing distribution rights to ensuring ownership across jurisdictions. How these divergences will resolve (or clash) remains to be seen.

For media and entertainment stakeholders, the message is clear: monitoring international legal standards for AI in content creation is as critical as keeping up with domestic developments. Should AI generated content be restricted in certain jurisdictions but not others? Are new strategies needed to manage rights globally, not just domestically? The splintered legal landscape demands proactive strategies to secure creative works and adapt to changing laws. As AI continues to reshape how content is created, shared, and protected, vigilance in navigating these international trends will be critical.