Music Publishers Canada Intervenes in Landmark Federal Court Case on AI and Copyright
On July 15, 2026, Music Publishers Canada filed submissions with the Federal Court as an intervener in one of the first legal proceedings in Canada about the intersection between generative AI and copyright law. The case is likely to have a significant impact on how Canadian law determines whether a musical work created with the assistance of generative AI tools is eligible for copyright protection, and if so, who is the author of that work.
The proceeding, which was initiated by the Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC), challenges the validity of a Canadian copyright registration for a visual image called SURYAST. SURYAST was created using a generative AI tool that can modify an image provided by a user to match the artistic style of a specific artist or piece of art. In this case, an individual named Ankit Sahni used the generative AI tool, which he developed, to modify a photograph he had taken to match the style of Vincent Van Gogh’s The Starry Night painting. In 2021, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office granted a copyright registration for SURYAST, listing Mr. Ankit and the AI tool as co-authors.
Although CIPPIC’s challenge relates specifically to SURYAST, it addresses broader questions of whether an AI tool can “author” a work for copyright purposes and when, if ever, a work created with AI tools should receive copyright protection. The answers to those questions are likely to have far-reaching implications for the music publishing industry. For that reason, Music Publishers Canada requested the opportunity to make submissions about the broader implications the Court’s decision may have and the framework the Court should use to decide those questions in view of today’s creative and technological landscape.
In June 2026, the Federal Court granted Music Publishers Canada’s request to make submissions as an intervener. In doing so, the Court noted that Music Publishers Canada “has the necessary knowledge, skills and resources to meaningfully and usefully participate in this proceeding.” The Court highlighted Music Publishers Canada’s participation in other important copyright cases and its participation in Government of Canada consultations about the intersection of copyright law and AI.
Music Publishers Canada’s submissions to the Court focus on the following points:
Only a human can be an author for copyright purposes. While there may be circumstances where copyright protection is afforded to a work created by a human with the help of AI tools, the AI tool itself should not be recognized as a legal “author.”
Canada’s approach to assessing whether copyright protects works created with AI tools should be consistent with the approaches that are being adopted in other jurisdictions around the world that have started to address the same questions.
A principled yet flexible approach is needed to assess whether a work created with AI tools attracts copyright protection. Copyright law in Canada already assesses copyright protection by focusing on the extent of the human author’s contributions of skill and judgment to the creation of the work. That should be no different in the AI context: courts should take a case-by-case, contextual look at how a creator used AI to support their creative efforts instead of adopting a categorical, “one-size-fits-all” approach.
Music Publishers Canada’s intervention is part of its ongoing advocacy initiatives to ensure that the interests of the music publishing industry are represented as law and policy relating to AI develops in Canada. Its submissions will ensure that the voices of its members are heard and that the realities of today’s creative industries are acknowledged as the Court makes its decisions on the important issues in this case.
Music Publishers Canada is represented in this proceeding by Casey Chisick, Eric Mayzel, Claire Stempien, and Steven Henderson at Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP.