Clause · Intellectual Property — Patents, Trade Marks, Copyright, Designs
Clause set: ownership of AI-generated output and training-data rights (with warranties and indemnities)
Clauses for contracts involving generative AI: who owns outputs (and what happens where no copyright subsists), whether customer data may be used for training, training-data warranties, output indemnities and records of human contribution.
- Kind
- Clause. Wording to drop into a longer document.
- Where it applies
- Australia, United Kingdom (England and Wales), United States, European Union
- AI use
- Yellow AI can help in set ways. A lawyer checks specific points before use.
- Law stated as at
- 17 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked against the cited sources on 17 October 2026.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use in services, licensing, data-licensing or AI development agreements where a party will use generative AI to produce deliverables or will receive data that could be used for training. Choose the customer-side or supplier-side alternatives. For full SaaS terms use the technology contracts library.
How AI may be used
AI may draft the clause set from the instructions and the vendor's technical description and compare it with the counterparty's terms. The ownership position, risk allocation and indemnity scope are settled by the lawyer.
AI may
- Extract ownership, training-use, retention and indemnity terms from the counterparty's AI terms into a comparison table.
- Fill the definitions from the vendor's technical description of the system and data flows.
- Check the clause set for consistency with the main agreement's liability and IP clauses.
AI must not
- Must not state that copyright subsists in AI outputs or that training on third-party material is lawful.
- Must not choose between the customer and supplier alternatives.
- Must not upload the client's confidential deal terms to a tool that trains on inputs.
The lawyer checks
- The ownership clause works even if no copyright subsists in the outputs.
- Training-data permissions match the client's privacy obligations (APPs 6, 8 and 11) and any confidentiality duties to third parties.
- Indemnity exclusions and caps align with the main agreement.
Method: how the Green, Yellow and Red levels are decided. This is guidance for planning, not legal advice.
Read the full text
The full text is for signed-in accounts. It is free. When you sign in you can:
- read the whole precedent, with its drafting notes beside it;
- copy it, or download it as a Word file or Markdown;
- add it to your firm’s knowledge base, so colleagues can find it;
- let the AI tools you connect read it from that knowledge base.
The summary, the law it rests on and the AI-use guidance above stay public. Privacy.
More in Intellectual Property — Patents, Trade Marks, Copyright, Designs
- Trade mark clearance search report and filing recommendation
- IP infringement letter of demand (trade mark, copyright, design, patent) with unjustified-threats check
- Deed of assignment of intellectual property (with moral rights consent)
- Research collaboration contract (Australian IP Toolkit for Collaboration and HERC IP Framework) — use guide
- Memo: AI contribution, inventorship and authorship before filing
All precedents for Intellectual Property — Patents, Trade Marks, Copyright, Designs · Tasks and AI use in this area