The Copyright Act 1987 came into force 39 years ago, when the internet was still in its infancy. Successive amendments have not fully kept pace with technological change. On 14 July 2026, the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO) published a public consultation paper proposing wide-ranging reforms, with feedback closing on 14 August 2026. The proposals respond to four pressures: generative AI at scale, global regulatory divergence, enforcement gaps and commercialisation blind spots.
1. AI Training and Copyright
Stakeholders have raised concerns over the use of copyright works, including news content, for AI training without permission or compensation. MyIPO poses an open question: should Malaysia adopt a purpose-based model (as in Japan, where the information analysis exception applies only where the use is not for enjoyment of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the right holder), a lawful access model (as in Singapore, where the work must be lawfully accessed, for example purchased, licensed, subscribed to or open access), or a hybrid of the two?
2. Stronger Digital Enforcement
- TPM and RMI: a broader definition of technological protection measures, prohibitions on circumvention and on removing or altering rights management information, and liability for tools designed for either, in line with Articles 18.68 and 18.69 of the CPTPP.
- Dynamic injunctions: one court order capable of covering mirror, clone or successor sites, without returning to court each time a domain changes.
- Service provider accountability: a proposed expedited notice-and-takedown timeframe of 12 hours, with safe harbour contingent on timely and appropriate action.
- Domain name seizure: explicit powers to seize and forfeit domain names used for infringement.
3. Commercialisation and Governance
- Artist’s Resale Right: a royalty for creators each time an original artwork is resold through an auction house, gallery or dealer, a right adopted in more than 90 countries.
- Orphan works: an EU-style regime allowing archives, libraries, universities and digital repositories to digitise and share works for non-commercial purposes after a diligent search.
- Other proposals: stronger oversight of collective management organisations, Copyright Tribunal jurisdiction over royalty disputes without mutual consent, a modernised Copyright Voluntary Notification (CVN) process, and a clearer boundary between copyright and industrial design.
Five Steps to Take Now
- AI developers and adopters should map the sources of their training data and keep records of licences and access terms. Under a lawful access test, provenance may be decisive.
- Platforms and ISPs should stress-test their takedown workflows against a 12-hour window, as safe harbour protection may depend on it.
- Rights holders should embed TPM and RMI in their digital works, which the reforms are designed to give real force.
- Galleries, auction houses and collectors should anticipate resale royalty obligations in pricing, consignment terms and sale documentation.
Content owners should file CVNs for key works and maintain clear chain-of-title records ahead of enhanced evidentiary recognition
Author:
Muhammad Akif bin Hashim, Associate
akif@ridzalaw.com.my
Mohamed Ridza & Co.
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
https://www.ridzalaw.com.my/
