26/02/2026
The EU AI Act is the world’s first comprehensive legal framework regulating artificial intelligence. It takes a risk-based approach, with the strictest obligations applying to “high-risk” AI systems. Many automotive AI applications fall into this category, particularly those linked to safety and vehicle control. The Act introduces requirements around risk management, data governance, technical documentation, transparency and human oversight. For automotive OEMs, this should not just be a compliance issue, it should be an IP strategy issue.
Start by mapping your AI-related assets; identify algorithms, models, training data and use cases across ADAS, automated driving, driver monitoring, infotainment, and predictive maintenance. A clear internal inventory helps align IP protection with regulatory exposure.
Then assess patent and trade secret coverage. Patent filings should focus on safety-critical AI functionality, control strategies and system-level integration, anything where disclosure might be required. At the same time, trade secrets remain vital for training pipelines, model tuning methods and curated datasets. Careful internal controls are essential, along with clear evidence of development history and ownership.
Documentation becomes strategically important. The AI Act requires extensive technical records for high-risk systems. That material often overlaps with invention disclosures, and so well-structured IP documentation can support regulatory submissions while avoiding unnecessary public disclosure.
Freedom to operate analysis must also evolve to reflect the realities of regulated AI systems. AI supply chains are complex. Third-party models, software frameworks and sensor technologies will likely sit inside regulated systems. FTO work should consider not only patent risk, but also licence terms, open-source constraints and obligations to share certain safety-related information with regulators or partners.
IP strategy should also link to system safety cases. Risk management, performance validation and human oversight are central under the Act. Protecting innovations in these areas can create defensible differentiation, not just compliance.
Finally, collaboration is key. Patent, regulatory, engineering and product teams must work together from an early stage. Filing strategies should reflect regulatory timelines. Internal processes should allow technical evidence gathered for compliance to feed efficiently into IP protection, and vice versa.
In short, the EU AI Act pushes automotive companies to treat AI governance and IP strategy as two sides of the same coin. Those who integrate them early will be better protected, better prepared and more competitive in a tightly regulated market.
This article is for general information only. Its content is not a statement of the law on any subject and does not constitute advice. Please contact Reddie & Grose LLP for advice before taking any action in reliance on it.
