Opening Address by Minister for Law and Second Minister for Home Affairs, Mr Edwin Tong SC at the Global Forum on Intellectual Property 2026

26 August 2026 Posted in Speeches

Dr Tan See Leng
Minister for Trade and Industry (Energy and Industry)

Your Excellency Mr Hem Vanndy
Minister of Industry, Science, Technology, and Innovation, Cambodia

Your Excellency Dr Supratman Andi Agtas
Minister of Law, Indonesia

Your Excellency Mr Daren Tang
Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

Mr Nicky Tan
Chairman of the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS)

Mr Tan Kong Hwee
Chief Executive of IPOS

Your Excellencies
Distinguished guests
Ladies and gentlemen

Introduction

1.                 A very good morning to all of you.

2.                 Let me start by warmly welcoming all of those who came from far away to Singapore. Besides sitting in a formal setting like this, I would also warmly invite you to sample the culture, the food, and experience a lot more about Singapore. I can tell you that there is no copyright to good food. You can go out there and sample as many as you like and repeat them. You can also take them home and replicate them at home as well.

3.                 I had the chance to meet many of you at last evening’s welcome reception. I hope you had a good opening, and that you are ready for the week ahead.

4.                 I could start this morning by giving you lots of IP data, examples and statistics, but I thought I would start with something quite different – with what I received as a gift for my birthday earlier this year.

IP Lessons Behind Birthday Present

5.                 I turned 57 and my colleagues decided that reaching 57 was a very important milestone, one that required proper documentation.

6.                 So they presented me with a book entitled: “57 Totally Unofficial, Unverified and Unsolicited Observations About Our 57-Year-Old Boss.” It is a picture book documenting what they regard as my quirks and contradictions. I should emphasise that the observations are, as the title says, unofficial and unverified. But the part about it being unsolicited, of course, is entirely true.

7.                 The book even came with a completely fictitious newspaper article reporting on its apparent book launch, including a photograph of me proudly holding up the book. For the avoidance of doubt, that is not me, and I certainly did not wear a tuxedo into the office on my birthday. All of that was generated by AI, and what I found particularly interesting about it was that, while it was done by AI fairly easily, it still had substantial human involvement.

8.                 Someone brave had to come up with the idea. Someone had to prompt the AI, refine the outputs, and assemble everything into a finished product.

9.                 So the point is, AI did not replace human creativity, but of course, it dramatically expanded on what humans could do. Something which previously might have required an illustrator, a photographer or a journalist, could now be produced with lesser resources, much faster, and by people who do not possess any of those skills.

10.             This little example is just one of many of a much broader shift that we all encounter and see.  We are seeing AI-generated microdramas and music, characters and games, slogans and advertisements, product designs and computer code, and even molecules, materials and potentially new drugs.

11.             AI is completely changing how we create. But more than that, it also completely changes who can create, what you can create, how quickly you can do so, and at what cost.

12.             Which really brings me to the theme of today’s Forum: “The Rise of AI: Is It IP as Usual?”

The Rise of AI: Is It IP as Usual?

13.             I think we all in this room would know that the short answer is, and as Nicky showed us earlier with his chart, clearly not.

14.             But I do not think we should start by beginning to ask what new rules we might need. We should start with a more fundamental question: What do we need our IP system to achieve in this new AI-enabled world?

15.             The purposes of IP have not fundamentally changed. We want people and businesses to have the confidence, the space and the resources to create and invent. That is the baseline. We want IP to drive growth. We want it to drive creativity, and we want knowledge to be shared, so that others can build upon it. And we want markets in which ideas, technology and brands can be recognised, and over time, commercialised.

16.             What has changed is the environment in which the IP system operates. Not fundamentally the IP system itself, but the environment in which it is operating in.

17.             Just two or three years ago, much of the AI-IP debate centred on authorship, ownership, training data and infringement. Who owns an AI-generated work? Can it be protected and is it capable of being protected? Can copyrighted material be used to train AI, and to what extent? When does an AI output infringe on someone else’s rights?

18.             Those questions are all important, and we will explore them.

19.             But I think also, that AI has moved on. Its capabilities have advanced substantially. Its uses have widened and spread.  And its impact is felt across many parts of the innovation and creative economy. So the conversation that we are having around IP and its users – how it applies and to what it applies – has also changed.

20.             There are many developments we could discuss,  but if we spend our time discussing all the developments, we will be here until next year’s IP Week. So I thought this morning, I will just highlight three broad areas that I think are important for us to think about, because each of these areas raises itself a broader question about how the IP system needs to evolve in an AI-enabled world.

21.             First, from creation to authenticity of creation.

22.             For most of the history of IP, creating something was the hardest part. With AI, creation has become much easier, as you saw from the example earlier.

23.             Just take music. In January last year, Deezer was receiving around 10,000 fully AI-generated tracks a day per day. Today, it stands at 90,000. And I am sure if you ask that question one year from now, it will be exponentially higher. At its peak, more than half of all new music submitted to the platform was AI-generated.

24.             So the question is no longer simply: Can AI create? Because clearly, it can. The questions are increasingly:

Who created it?

Can the human prompter be considered the author of this graphic design or song? Should the developer of the AI model be considered as a co-creator?

25.             Courts as well as IP offices around the world broadly agree that an author must be a human being. But where do we draw the line? What kinds of acts or decisions made by human prompters demonstrate sufficient creativity? And that line and that spectrum will change as technology evolves.

26.             There is still an innate, human desire to connect to a piece of art that represents the soul of another, and the authenticity of creation is as much a copyright question as it is a humane one.

27.             This itself points to a broader shift. When content becomes abundant, true human ingenuity becomes more, not less, invaluable. IP will increasingly be about not just protecting what is created, but also establishing who created it. I think this is a new question or a new dimension that we should think about carefully.

28.             Second, the impact of copyright rules on innovation.

29.             Our approach has always been not to over regulate, from the inception at least, to create space for experimentation and for innovation. Much of the early AI debate focused on whether copyrighted works could be legally used to train AI and that debate continues around the world. Just last week, another lawsuit was filed in the United States against Anthropic and AI music company Suno over the alleged use of more than 500 song lyrics for AI training. This follows on a German court’s decision against Suno in another similar case in July 2026, just a few weeks prior, on the basis that it had breached fair or lawful access provisions in obtaining content through stream ripping, with which to train its AI.

30.             Now, this is an issue which will increasingly come up, as AI becomes more prevalent as a creative tool, more powerful in its application, and increasingly it will seek more and more content on which to train its models. 

31.             On the one hand, as I said, we want to promote, and not stifle, innovation.

32.             But on the other, it is a very important consideration as well, and that is - the rights of creators must also be carefully considered and balanced, and it would not be good for us in the long term, if creative works can be ingested at scale by an AI model, without there being a framework to recognise the creation.

33.             These are questions that we want to examine with stakeholders, especially those in the creative economy, which is already encountering some of these challenges and practices.

34.             For us in Singapore, our Computational Data Analysis (CDA) exception in Singapore has provided a measure of legal certainty. It has served us well, reflecting our policy consideration to support innovation and creation, whilst at the same time, respecting rights holders’ interests. 

35.             But as AI grows more pervasive, I think we have to ensure that the CDA exception continues to strike the right balance.

36.             We have looked around the world to see who else around the world is facing the same issues, and we see different approaches. Japan and EU have exceptions that permit text and data mining. The US has a fair use provision, which some say, can allow AI training. Countries, such as Australia, have taken a more restrictive approach. South Korea is considering proposals in this area, and meanwhile India is proposing a mandatory licensing framework. 

37.             All of these are different approaches in different jurisdictions. We will study them, but the fact is that the focus on this issue around the world is not a coincidence. Instead, it is a reflection of the fact that, in this space, a clear market is emerging. Publishers, news organisations and other rights holders are increasingly licensing their content to AI companies. In fact, a UK study this year found that the number of publishers licensing content for AI is expected to almost double in the year 2026.

38.             Equally, the rise in litigation suggest that a number of practical questions still remain, regarding how rights holders should protect their work if they do not want it to be used for AI training. The solution might well be to deploy more technical measures; but if we do so, we must consider how less well-resourced rights holders can then be supported in these efforts. 

39.             We will carefully study the global landscape, look at the different approaches, and consider an approach that gives us the appropriate balance, and this will come after consultation with a broad range of stakeholders, including those from the creative industries, technology companies, academics, creators, inventors and all interested parties.

40.             Third, from scarcity to abundance.

41.             AI is also dramatically changing where business value comes from.

42.             Content, software and designs that once required significant time and expertise can now be generated much more quickly and at a lower cost.

43.             That does not make creativity less valuable. But it may change what gives a business its edge. If anyone can generate a good advertisement in seconds, the brand behind it may then matter more than the advertisements around it. If thousands of product designs can be generated overnight, the advantage may lie less in generating them, and more in knowing with data what your consumers want, know-how and networks to bring it to the market.

44.             This comes as intangible assets are already becoming more important, as you heard from Nicky earlier. WIPO reported that global investment in intangibles, including software, data, R&D and brands, exceeded US$10 trillion in 2025, and has been growing much faster than investment in physical assets. AI will no doubt accelerate that shift.

45.             So the question for businesses is increasingly not just “What IP do I own?” But “What gives my business an edge, and how do I turn that with IP into value that is transformative?”

46.             And that brings me to Singapore’s approach.

Singapore’s Approach

47.             A few years ago, in 2021, we launched the Singapore IP Strategy 2030 (SIPS 2030). My colleague Minister Tan and I oversee SIPS 2030. It is born from a recognition that an increasing share of enterprise value will come from intangible assets, and SIPS 2030 sets out how Singapore could help businesses create, manage and commercialise them.

48.             And mind you, 2021 was the age before ChatGPT, and before generative AI became part of our everyday life.

49.             So AI does not change that ambition. It simply changes what we now need to do to achieve that ambition as we build on SIPS 2030. Our approach must evolve too. We cannot keep it as business as usual.

50.             I would like to highlight three priorities that we are thinking about as we shift our approach with the advent of AI, generative AI, and the evolving technology that will no doubt be upon us shortly.

51.             First, it is important that the rules be kept fit for purpose.

52.             The framework must always evolve. There is no point keeping it static because the technologies will not wait for us.

53.             Good IP rules have always had to balance different interests, giving creators and businesses confidence to invest, whilst at the same time, leaving room for new ideas and new technologies to develop.

54.             AI, of course, will make that balance more complex.

55.             So today, we will be launching a public consultation on AI and IP. We will examine all sides of the IP and AI equation:

a.          How rights holders and AI developers can have greater certainty when it comes to using copyrighted works for AI training,

b.          And on the patents side, how inventors can be better assured that the patent system remains relevant in light of AI.

56.             The question is not simply how we apply yesterday’s rules to today’s technology. If we do that, we will be very quickly outdated. We have to ask ourselves what rules will best continue to encourage creation and innovation as the way we create evolves, If this means removing some of the old rules and having new ones, we are prepared to make that commitment, and we will move as quickly as the industry moves. We invite views from the public, which we will consider carefully, including on the issues which I have outlined earlier.

57.             Second, we intend to strengthen the capabilities to compete on intangibles.

58.             What does that mean? Having a good set of rules is important, but I think that is not going to be enough.

59.             As AI makes it easier to create and replicate, businesses will need to become a lot more deliberate about identifying, protecting and then deploying the intangible assets that will distinguish their business.

60.             That is why we are introducing a Technical Reference on Enterprise IA and IP Management, and developing a new Certificate Programme in Enterprise IA and IP Management to complement the technical reference.

61.             And through an enhanced IP Grow, we will make it easier for Singapore and overseas enterprises to connect better with the resources and the expertise that they will need to leverage AI to grow the business, and to transform intangible assets to something that is of value.

62.             The objective is broader than any one programme.

63.             We want IA and IP to become a core business capability – intuitive and embedded in every company’s business model, on how to develop products, how to enter markets, how to form partnerships and compete with the rest of the world.

64.             The third focus is on building markets for intangible value.

65.             Ultimately, businesses must be able to convert and transform those intangibles into value. For that to happen, investors, financiers, buyers and licensees will need confidence in the assets and what they are worth. That, today, remains a challenge.

66.             So we are strengthening the infrastructure around intangible asset valuation. Our Intangible Asset Valuation Guidelines will help build greater consistency as well as confidence in how such assets are valued. Developed by the Institute of Valuers and Appraisers Singapore (IVAS), with the support of the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA), IPOS, as well as industry partners, the Guidelines will establish clearer guidance to support robust, transparent, and consistent practices around IA valuation.

67.             But as we all know, intangible assets move easily and quickly across borders but valuation practices can remain quite different between different jurisdictions, and that remains a challenge. That is why the Global IA Valuation Network is established. It brings together six founding organisations with intellectual property, valuation and commercialisation expertise – the International Trademark Association, the International Valuation Standards Council, the Licensing Executives Society International, the World Intellectual Property Organization, IVAS, as well as IPOS.

68.             Six organisations with expertise and networks from around the world, and most importantly, expertise that can drive change, so that we can eventually, I hope, land on a common platform for valuation, because that is what drives commercialisation. This Network will serve as a dedicated global platform for the organisations, to share knowledge, exchange perspectives, and encourage greater international alignment on best practice, whilst at the same time, taking care to respect the diverse legal, regulatory, and as well as the commercial markets in which valuations take place. We understand that they take place in different countries. You might have different nuances, cultural contexts, and regulatory regimes. All of those will be respected as we strive towards a unified, common and global platform.

69.             Beyond the Network, Singapore is also deepening its international partnerships. Together with WIPO, we are co-hosting the Regional Dialogue on IP Valuation and Financing for Southeast Asia, to facilitate peer learning as well as regional collaboration. Within ASEAN, we continue to work closely with our regional partners through the ASEAN Working Group on Intellectual Property Cooperation (AWGIPC), as Singapore prepares to assume the ASEAN as well as AWGIPC Chairmanships concurrently next year.

70.             We also continue to collaborate with the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) through its Singapore branch, to strengthen capabilities in IP as well as technology dispute resolution. In fact, tomorrow afternoon, we will hold the second run of Appropriate Dispute Resolution for Technology and Intellectual Property in Singapore (ADR TIPS), co-organised with CIArb.

71.             What does all this mean? The longer-term objective is to develop greater knowledge, greater know-how and deeper expertise, and a far greater understanding and a common language around intangible value, so that these assets can be more readily invested in. If you are an investor, you are a financier, you will need to know that there is a common platform on which to value assets, so that when they are transferable across different jurisdictions, the same recognition in value will be given.

72.             Taken together, I would say these are not separate initiatives. They are parts of the same spectrum – rules that support creation and innovation; capabilities that help businesses manage what they create; as well as markets that allow those assets to be turned into value.

Looking Ahead

73.             All of these are clear, tangible steps we are taking today, to commit to building a stronger suite of IP services across Singapore.

74.             But at the same time, while we are building for today, I think we need to pop our heads above the parapet every so often and look at the future – look further ahead at challenges which might come our way or be just around the corner.

75.             One question which I believe will become increasingly important, as we see the advent and rise of AI and technology, is this: When AI makes creation abundant, where will real value lie? Perhaps increasingly, the real value ought to lie in what AI cannot create, and what AI will find difficult to replicate.

(i)                Human judgement and creativity.

(ii)               Trusted brands and relationships, that many businesses have built over decades.

(iii)              Proprietary data and know-how about your product, customers, and markets.

(iv)             The accumulated knowledge within an organisation.

76.             That could change not only what businesses regard as valuable, but what the IP system itself needs to support. We will therefore need to ask whether existing IP rights continue to provide the right incentives when the economics of creation evolves. We will need better ways to recognise and manage valuable intangibles that may not fit neatly within traditional categories of IP. And we may need new rules for trust – around authorship, for example – as the line between human and AI-generated content becomes harder and harder to discern.

77.             These are not questions Singapore alone can answer, it needs a common consensus across a broader community. That is precisely why we are here at IP Week. IP Week is not simply a place to discuss the issues we already know. It is really a platform to bring different perspectives together, so that we see the challenges through the other person’s lenses, identify the questions that keep coming up and that will be upon us as a community, and strive as far as we can to work collectively on the answers. Because no one part of the IP ecosystem sees the whole picture.

(i)                Creators understand creation.

(ii)               Businesses will be focused on markets.

(iii)              Technologists will look at what technology can offer and what is possible.

(iv)             Governments and IP offices understand the frameworks and will need to look at protection and regulation.

78.             We need all of those perspectives if we are to shape what comes next. Earlier on, Nicky said we have such a tremendously stellar gathering of participants from so many different jurisdictions. I think this occasion really gives us the best opportunity to create the environment for those discussions.

Conclusion

79.             Finally, as I conclude, let me end where I began – on that publication that I got for my birthday. AI helped my colleagues produce a picture book and an entirely fictitious newspaper article in a fraction of the time it might once have taken. But even today as I reflect on the gift, the AI product was not what made the present valuable to me. The value to me came from the people behind it –their thought, their effort, their creativity, and their rather questionable sense of humour. Why the book is valuable to me is not because of AI but because of the people who brought it together. My colleagues who came together, thought about it and decided to put up that publication. As the fictitious Chief Editor was quoted in the fictitious newspaper article as saying, there is only one copy, and she would entertain offers only provided they are “sufficiently _un_reasonable”.

80.             So the point I want to make as I end the session is this: AI gives us extraordinary new possibilities, and I am not even sure we are at the end of that cycle. It will be far more extensive, deeper, and a lot more innovative. But it is human ingenuity that gives those possibilities purpose, and ultimately, value.

81.             Our challenge is to ensure that the IP system evolves with technology, that it remains dynamic and not static, that it continues to encourage that ingenuity, helps turn it into value, and gives people the confidence to keep creating.

82.             With that perspective, I hope that you will have a tremendous IP Week. As I said, take the opportunity apart from formal sessions to share a coffee, have a casual conversation, build networks, strengthen that collaboration across the community, across the world. I think that will be a tremendous outcome, speaking for myself for this IP Week. I wish all of you a pleasant stay in Singapore.

83.             Thank you very much.

Last updated on 26 August 2026