Telefilm's AI policy keeps Canadian copyright with the applicant

The shot

Telefilm Canada, the federal Crown corporation that finances Canadian feature film production, states on its own site that it 'adopted a business policy to establish parameters for the use of AI in funded projects,' dated 17 November 2025 and titled 'Business policy - Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Projects.' The policy applies across 'all Telefilm funding programs' and to scripts, films, festivals and other funded activities. Separately, the Canadian Media Producers Association (CMPA), the industry body representing Canadian independent producers, maintains its own Artificial Intelligence Resources page for members, built around a commissioned report from Dentons Canada LLP and an October 2024 member webinar.

What the documents show

Telefilm's own policy sets out four named principles: a 'Human-Created Requirement' barring projects 'primarily created by AI' while permitting AI-powered assistance, storyboard and accessibility tools; a transparency principle requiring AI use to be 'disclosed to Telefilm during the application process' through its Dialogue platform, with periodic aggregated public reporting; encouragement of innovation with no funding penalty for using new tools, provided existing guidelines are met; and a requirement that intellectual property in a funded project remain with a Canadian rights holder, placing the burden on applicants to check that an AI tool's licence terms do not conflict with that ownership requirement. CMPA's own resources page, by contrast, is framed as guidance for members navigating 'legal, ethical, and practical implications,' built on outside counsel's analysis rather than a CMPA-issued rule; it names an internal AI Working Group chaired by producer and lawyer Stephen Stohn.

The workflow

A Telefilm applicant must disclose AI use at initial application and again on project completion through the Dialogue platform, account for AI use in a project's sustainability plan where applicable, and confirm that any AI tool's licence terms are compatible with Telefilm's Canadian-ownership requirement before relying on its output. A CMPA member, by comparison, has access to a commissioned report and past webinar recordings as reference material, without a CMPA-issued funding condition attached to using them.

What the tool does not change

Telefilm's policy explicitly states it 'complements the guidelines of each program' and does not override any existing program-specific requirement, and it keeps the applicant 'solely responsible' for AI use; it is not a certification that Telefilm has reviewed or approved any specific AI tool. CMPA's page is a members' toolkit, not a negotiated agreement comparable to the ACTRA-CMPA-AQPM Independent Production Agreement's separate Generative Artificial Intelligence article, documented elsewhere in this record; the two CMPA-linked documents should not be treated as the same instrument.

• Has AI use in your Telefilm-funded project been disclosed at both application and completion stages through Dialogue?
• Do the AI tool's licence terms conflict with Telefilm's requirement that project IP remain with a Canadian rights holder?
• Are you relying on CMPA's member resources where a qualified lawyer's independent review is actually required?

Between the two organisations, only Telefilm's own site documents a binding funding condition; CMPA's own site documents a resource library for its members, and treating the two as equivalent overstates what the producers' association has itself published.