Intellectual property and artificial intelligence: is your AI-generated creation really protected?
Written by Victoria Azar
When you create a work with the help of artificial intelligence, you can protect it as a distinctive sign with the National Office for Industrial Property (ONAPI) and as a work with the National Copyright Office (ONDA).
Therefore, the first step must be to understand how each of these institutions deals with this type of content. Only based on that understanding can a robust protection strategy be designed.
Why protection goes beyond registration: differing criteria between ONAPI and ONDA
In the Dominican Republic, ONAPI and ONDA currently approach artificial intelligence from different perspectives, without yet having formal, publicly available criteria.
This means that the same creation, even if registrable through both institutions, may be treated differently depending on which office it is submitted to. To a large extent, the outcome will depend on how the application for registration is structured and substantiated.
The difference between the two approaches is reflected in how each institution assesses the protection of content generated by artificial intelligence:
▪️ONAPI
Currently, ONAPI does not require the technological origin of the sign to be registered, nor does it examine the chain of titles for the content submitted.
This neutrality, in the absence of prior analysis, may work against the owner, as the terms of use of the most widely used artificial intelligence platforms do not confer full or irrevocable ownership.
As a result, a registered trademark without such verification could be based on a contractually fragile right and could affect the rights to this intangible asset.
▪️ONDA
The approach is different in ONDA. From a legal practice perspective, we have observed that merely mentioning the involvement of artificial intelligence is enough for registration to be rejected, even though legal doctrine recognizes that active and sufficient human involvement could be compatible with the law.
In other words, copyright protection can be obtained if the case is presented and substantiated strategically.
The importance of a legal strategy: tailoring the registration application to each institution
Given this reality, the same procedure should not be applied to every registration application. On the contrary, the approach should be to tailor each application to the specific requirements of each institution and to the characteristics of the content to be protected.
An effective action plan involves reviewing the AI-generated content in advance, as well as the terms and conditions of the tools used.
This allows the specific risks of each case to be assessed and a strategy to be designed that is aligned with the requirements of the institution to which the registration application will be submitted.
This approach does not follow a generic procedure or a routine process. It seeks to prepare the applicant’s application based on how each institution examines, interprets and decides in practice, going beyond what is set out in the general regulations.
Indeed, it is precisely the accumulated knowledge of how ONDA and ONAPI really operate that enables us to anticipate obstacles which the rights holder would otherwise only discover after submitting the application.
These obstacles include both the rejection of the application as well as its eventual granting without the rights holder being aware of the limitations, vulnerabilities or legal risks associated with the registration of content created with the aid of artificial intelligence.
These risks may arise, amongst other factors, from the terms and conditions of the platforms used, as well as from the level of human intervention involved in the content’s generation
The same content generated with the aid of artificial intelligence may be accepted by one office and rejected by the other. This occurs when the registration process is not tailored to the way both institutions operate in practice. This outcome does not arise because the law dictates it, but because the way the application was submitted was not adapted to the specific approach of each examiner.
Preventing this outcome – rather than merely completing a formality – is what defines our support in this area.
In the absence of defined standards, it is our support that makes the difference
Whilst ONAPI and ONDA have yet to publish official guidelines on content generated using artificial intelligence, the legal certainty of these assets does not depend solely on current legislation.
It also depends on how each case is prepared and defended before both institutions, which currently make decisions without a uniform set of criteria.
It is precisely in this area that specialized support makes the difference between obtaining apparent protection and truly robust protection.
The commitment to innovation with artificial intelligence is to translate this regulatory uncertainty into an informed strategy, which allows for:
✅ A thorough understanding of each institution’s actual criteria.
✅ Anticipating the risks involved.
✅ Drafting, from the first moment, applications tailored to the requirements of a system that is still learning to respond to these technologies.
This way, whilst the Dominican regulatory framework continues to adapt, you no longer depend on the whims of the examiner on duty, but on a protection strategy, tailor-made for your creations generated with the support of artificial intelligence.
Back to publications 
