Public Consultation on Artificial Intelligence and Singapore's Intellectual Property Regime

26 AUG 2026

Consultation Period:
26 August 2026 to 22 October 2026

MinLaw and IPOS are seeking views on the impact of artificial intelligence ("AI") on Singapore's intellectual property ("IP") regime. The public consultation period is from 26 August 2026 to 22 October 2026.

Executive Summary

AI is changing how people create, invent, research and do business. Singapore’s IP regime is anchored on a careful balance: protecting the rights and incentives that support human creativity and investment, while enabling innovation for the public good. This consultation seeks views on how Singapore’s IP laws and frameworks can remain fit for purpose, trusted and responsive to emerging developments as AI continue to advance.

Singapore government agencies have adopted a co-creation approach to our national policy on AI issues. Earlier engagements by MinLaw and IPOS with rights owners, technology companies, representatives from the creative industries, legal practitioners, academics and other stakeholders helped identify the issues covered in this paper. This public consultation now seeks broader views and perspectives from interested parties. The aim is to ensure thoughtful, carefully calibrated IP frameworks that can continue to support innovation while protecting the interests that underpin human creativity and ingenuity.

For copyright, the consultation focuses on three broad areas:

  • How to foster greater certainty and accountability in AI training, including whether the scope and applications of the computational data analysis exception are sufficiently clear, how lawful access and rights-owner safeguards should operate in practice, and how the Government can support non-legally binding technical measures in a practical and industry-led way (see page 7).

  • Copyright risk management in AI deployment and use, including how existing legal principles should apply when AI-generated output infringes copyright, how responsibility should be assessed among AI developers, deployers and end users, and what technical measures may help minimise output infringement risks in a proportionate and commercially viable way (see page 12).

  • The nature of human creativity in AI-assisted works, focusing on how human contribution should be understood, recognised and evidenced where generative AI is used as a tool in creative and business workflows (see page 16).

Further details on the copyright consultation may be found at Part III (pages 7-19) of the paper.

For patents, the consultation focuses on two broad areas:

  • How existing inventorship principles should apply across the spectrum of human-AI interactions in the inventive process, including problem formulation, selection from AI-generated outputs, and human modification of AI-generated technical solutions (see page 20).

  • How the large-scale publication of AI-generated technical disclosures may affect the prior art landscape, including patent searches, examination, patentability assessments and incentives for innovation as AI-generated material becomes more publicly available (see page 24).

Further details on the patents consultation may be found at Part IV (pages 20-25) of the paper.

Public consultation documents

The public consultation paper can be accessed below:

Providing feedback

Please provide your feedback by 22 October 2026, 5 PM. Feedback may be submitted via either FormSG or via email to MinLaw:

By FormSG:

By Email:

When providing your responses, please include your name, contact number, and email address, so that we may contact you if there are any follow-up questions.

Confidentiality of feedback received

We reserve the right to make public all or parts of any written submission, and to disclose the identity of the source. Commenting parties may request for confidentiality for any part of the submission that is believed to be proprietary, confidential or commercially sensitive. Any such information should be clearly marked and placed in a separate annex. If we grant confidential treatment, we will consider, but will not publicly disclose, the information. If we reject the request for confidential treatment, the information will not be considered. As far as possible, parties should limit any request for confidential treatment of information submitted. We will not accept any submission that requests confidential treatment of all, or a substantial part, of the submission.