Países / Honduras

Derecho de autor e inteligencia artificial en Honduras

Before asserting Honduran copyright, identify the natural person who created each claimed expressive feature and trace that feature into the final work. Separate human authorship, compilation selection/arrangement, audiovisual production and phonogram first-fixation rights. Before asserting an individual OADAC/DIGEPIH GenAI grant or denial, obtain the certificate or reasoned refusal, deposited work, complete application, AI disclosures, file number and final review status.

Investigación abierta. Corte general del Atlas: 31 de agosto de 2026. Cobertura no significa revisión completa ni vigencia certificada.

Explorar Honduras en el mapa →

Marco y alcance

Autonomous output: article 11 is categorical that only natural persons can be authors. If the claimed expressive form was determined by a GenAI system rather than created by an identified natural person, there is no statutory author to whom copyright can attach. The statute has no necessary-arrangements or computer-generated-work fiction. Originality remains an independent element: article 2 protects original creations. A person must therefore show both human authorship and original expression, not merely ownership of the device, investment, intention, novelty, technical effort or a desired result. Prompting alone: a prompt may itself qualify as a separate literary work if its wording is original. That does not automatically make its writer author of visual, musical or textual expression that the model chose. No Honduran case fixes a prompt-count, iteration-count or percentage threshold. Assisted work: partial protection is supportable where original human expression can be identified in the final object, such as retained human text, drawing, photography, performance, code, arrangement, compositing, mask work, editing or other expressive choices. Protection is limited to that human layer and does not absorb autonomous residue. Causation and evidence: the claimant should map every asserted protected feature to a natural person's expressive decision using source files, layers, tracks, diffs, prompts, parameters, seeds, versions, model identifiers, intermediate outputs and contemporaneous editing notes. Selection of a preferred output is evidence of curation, not automatically authorship of its internal expression. Collective, employment and commissioning provisions allocate patrimonial rights only after human authorship exists. Article 18's collective-work presumption and article 19's employment transfer cannot create copyright in machine-determined expression by relabeling a company as author. Compilation/database route: articles 9(5) and 12 can protect an original human selection, coordination or arrangement of outputs or data. That layer does not protect every individual output, the underlying data or an unoriginal exhaustive accumulation. No separate general sui-generis database right applicable to the contents was located in the statute. Audiovisual route: the statute names director, script/adaptation/argument author, commissioned composer and animator-drawing author as coauthors and separately assigns exploitation powers to the producer. A producer's initiative, coordination, contract or investment therefore cannot replace the human coauthor analysis for synthetic elements. Phonogram/fixation route: a natural or legal person responsible for first fixing other sounds or representations of sounds may possess related rights in the fonogram. This is a plausible separate route for synthetic audio, subject to territorial and factual requirements. It does not establish authorship or copyright in an AI-generated composition, lyrics or voice. Software route: copyright in the GenAI program and patrimonial rights of its producer protect code and documentation under articles 32-34. They do not, without more, confer copyright authorship of every generated output on the programmer, platform or user. Registration: article 130 means copyright does not arise from the entry. Conversely, a certificate produces a rebuttable evidentiary presumption, not an irrebuttable judgment that all AI material is human-authored. The underlying application, deposited work, authorship disclosure, examination and any limitation or objection must be reviewed. Excluded evidence: a form, two-copy deposit, paid receipt, antecedent search, certificate template, generic certificate, ISBN, publication, platform terms, CMO repertoire, aggregate statistics or title containing AI cannot be counted as a grant. An individual outcome requires a linked work, disclosed GenAI facts, final act and scope. Evidence quality: the author and registry rules are high-confidence because they are express in the national statute and current official forms. The assisted-work threshold is conditioned because the WIPO/DIGEPIH guide is nonbinding and no national GenAI holding was located. The negative registration conclusion is necessarily bounded by non-exhaustive public access. Atomic exclusions: this issue does not resolve training-data infringement, text-and-data mining, substantial similarity, derivative-use permission, moral rights of input authors, performers' voice/image rights, privacy, personality, unfair competition, passing off, contract, consumer protection, trademarks, patents or designs.

Limitaciones documentadas

No published Honduran judicial or administrative merits decision was located that applies article 11 or originality to a disclosed modern GenAI output. No Honduran authority was located that fixes a threshold for prompts, iteration, seeds, reference images, inpainting, compositing, selection, curation or post-generation editing. No qualifying individual GenAI registration grant, limited grant, reasoned denial or appeal was located; the register and underlying files are not comprehensively public full-text or AI-tagged records. No case was located applying phonogram producer, audiovisual producer, software producer or compilation rights to synthetic content; those routes remain fact-specific and separate from authorial copyright. The WIPO guide was adapted in close collaboration with DIGEPIH but is expressly educational and nonbinding; it cannot substitute for a statute, reasoned administrative act or judgment. The Poder Judicial index reports a large public corpus but does not establish exhaustive publication of every lower-court, interlocutory or administrative matter. No consolidated national source later than the 2006 amendment was located that alters article 11; WIPO Lex marks the 2006 text as the latest version, but a same-day official Gazette verification of every subsequent legislative issue was not feasible from a searchable complete Gazette corpus.

Registro y actos documentados

Estado

none_located

Resumen

Honduras has an OADAC/DIGEPIH register for works, contracts and related-rights documents. Article 130 expressly makes registration declarative and nonconstitutive, while articles 128 and 135 contemplate refusal, inspection, certificates and no-entry constancias. No item was counted unless it identified the work and GenAI process and supplied a final registration, limited registration, reasoned denial or review outcome. A form, deposit, antecedent search, fee, certificate template, ISBN, repertoire entry, aggregate count, title mentioning AI or generic claim of registration is not an individual merits grant.

Actos documentados