The fast development of artificial intelligence (AI) systems that can generate text, images, music and other creative works has posed a large challenge to the traditional copyright law, which has always been based on the human authorship and intellectuality. This study analyzes the legal context of ownership rights, as applied to AI-generated creations, in India, European Union, and China on the basis of a comparative study. The research will attempt to assess the relevance of the present copyright principles concerning the AI-based creation and determine the regulatory practice that can potentially reconcile both technological innovation and the safeguarding of the rights of creators. The study follows a doctrinal and comparative research approach, in which the statutory requirements, regulatory trends, and judiciary interpretations are examined in the three jurisdictions. Indian system is associated with the high level of human authorship and traditional requirements of originality, which created ambiguity when it comes to ownership and protection of AI-created work. The European Union takes an approach of regulatory governance that emphasizes on issues of transparency, compliance with copyright, and safeguarding of training data and text-and-data mining, instead of redefining authorship itself. Conversely, China is more flexible and open to evolving interpretation with a copyright protection where there is reasonable human intellectual input or creative control of AI systems. The paper concludes that although there exists no jurisdiction that has conclusively answered the authorship question, all of them exhibit different policy priorities with regard to innovation, market regulation, as well as creative labour protection. The paper concludes based on the idea that a balanced approach connecting the principles of human-authorship and transparency instruments and the acknowledgement of AI-assisted creativity offers the most sustainable regulatory model. It recommends the harmonisation of more national frameworks through multilateral intellectual property efforts, clearer criteria on how to evaluate human input and that AI training should be ethically governed to keep the copyright law as relevant as it was previously in a more automated creative world.