Code written with the help of AI can be protected by copyright, if it is a creative work and “the result of the intellectual work of the author”. This is what Article 1 of the Italian copyright law says, as amended by Law 132/2025 and in force since 10 October 2025. On ownership, Article 12-bis only covers employees: with an external supplier it is worth writing it into the contract.
What did Law 132/2025 change in copyright?
It amended the first paragraph of Article 1 of Law 633/1941, the copyright law. The legge 23 settembre 2025, n. 132 (Law no. 132 of 23 September 2025), “Disposizioni e deleghe al Governo in materia di intelligenza artificiale” (provisions and delegations to the Government on artificial intelligence), was published in the Gazzetta Ufficiale (the Official Journal), Serie Generale no. 223 of 25 September 2025, and came into force on 10 October 2025.
The part on copyright is in Article 25, titled “Protection of the copyright of works generated with the aid of artificial intelligence”. There are two changes to the first paragraph of Article 1. After “opere dell’ingegno” (works of the mind) the word “umano” (human) is added. After “forma di espressione” (form of expression) a whole sentence is added: “even where created with the aid of artificial intelligence tools, provided that they constitute the result of the intellectual work of the author”.
The text of Article 1 in force now reads:
Works of the human mind of a creative character […] are protected under this law, whatever their mode or form of expression, even where created with the aid of artificial intelligence tools, provided that they constitute the result of the intellectual work of the author.
The new parts are the word “human” and the whole sentence beginning with “even where”, condition included. The creative character and the “mode or form of expression” were already there.
Is code written with AI protected by copyright?
It can be, if it meets the conditions of the law: a work of the human mind, of a creative character, that is the result of the intellectual work of the author. Using an AI assistant does not exclude it on its own, and the law says so expressly with that “even where created with the aid”.
Software was already covered by the law before 2025. The second paragraph of Article 1, which Law 132/2025 did not touch, says: “Computer programs are also protected as literary works within the meaning of the Berne Convention”. And Article 2, no. 8 protects programs “in whatever form expressed, provided that they are original as the result of the intellectual creation of the author”.
Our reading, which is not legal advice, is that both provisions apply to code. Article 2 requires an original program. Article 1, after the amendment, requires a work of the human mind that is the result of the intellectual work of the author, even when some of the lines were proposed by an assistant.
Is a software idea protected by copyright?
No. Article 2, no. 8 says it in full: “The ideas and principles underlying any element of a program, including those underlying its interfaces, remain excluded from the protection granted by this law”.
The same provision brings into the program something that is often left out of the discussion: “The term program also includes the preparatory material for the design of the program itself”. The law does not say what falls within it. The examples are ours: the analysis documents and the screen drafts made to design the software.
When you commission a piece of work, this weighs on the contract. If the contract only talks about the “source code”, it is worth asking for it to name the preparatory material as well.
How much human contribution is needed for code to be protected?
The law does not say. It requires the work to be “the result of the intellectual work of the author” and stops there, with no threshold and no list of activities that count.
What follows is our reading, and not legal advice.
In a custom project a person’s intellectual work can be shown in specific things: the analysis of how the company works and what it lacks, the decisions on how to split the program and which systems it has to talk to, the choice of which lines proposed by an assistant to keep and which to change, the corrections when something does not match the real process.
When a person makes these choices, and a record of them remains, it is easier to argue that the code is the result of their intellectual work. The record does not require special tools: the written analyses and the history of changes to the code, with the reasons for the decisions, are enough.
If the software is written by a supplier that uses AI assistants, the question passes to them: how much human work is behind the code, and where a record of it can be found.
Who owns code written by an employee?
The employer, as far as economic exploitation is concerned, unless otherwise agreed. Article 12-bis of Law 633/1941 says: “Unless otherwise agreed, the employer is the holder of the exclusive right of economic exploitation of the computer program or database created by the employee in the performance of their duties or on instructions given by the same employer.”
The provision talks about the employee. It concerns software written in-house, by people employed by the company, while doing their job or following the employer’s instructions.
Who owns the code if a supplier writes it?
Article 12-bis does not say, and that is why it is worth writing it into the contract. The provision concerns employees and says nothing about the external supplier that develops to order. Between a company and the software house it entrusts a project to, the safest route is for the contract to state in full who gets the source code and the exploitation rights, and for a lawyer to write it.
The question is worth asking before starting, when the answer costs one line of contract. Usually people think about it later, when they want to change supplier or have a new person work on the software.
What should a software development contract say?
At least four points, to take to whoever writes the contract before signing:
- the source code and the exploitation rights pass to whoever pays, stated in full;
- the preparatory material is included, since under Article 2, no. 8 it is part of the program;
- the supplier keeps a record of the human work behind the code: the analyses, the design decisions, the reviews;
- what happens when you change supplier: what is handed over, in what form, and what someone else needs to carry on the work.
The clauses are written by a lawyer, and it is to them that these questions should be taken. Here is the list of what is worth asking, read from the legal texts; how it translates into a contract depends on the project and the parties.
How do you check who owns the code of your software?
By rereading the contract with your current supplier. The first step costs nothing: you look for what it says about the source code and the exploitation rights, and whether it names the design material. If it does not mention them, it is worth asking the supplier to put it in writing, with the help of a lawyer.
For new software you start from the description of the problem and a conversation. On the custom software development page we describe how we build custom software, from analysis to maintenance, and there is also the answer to the question of who owns the source code. In our guarantees it is written like this: “The source code belongs to whoever paid for the work, and it stays yours even if one day you choose another supplier.” It is a commitment we make on ownership, and not an effect of Law 132/2025.
From that page you can ask for a first meeting. It starts with a call, free of charge.