The rapid integration of AI into the fashion and beauty industries is transforming traditional ideas about creativity, innovation, and ownership. Fashion designers and cosmetic formulators increasingly use AI technologies to create fashion designs, predict trends, and formulate cosmetics. This is shifting from a creative process that centres on human beings and uses algorithms to create products. As this evolution continues to occur, there are enormous implications for the ways in which these industries and nations that foster them protect their respective forms of intellectual property (IP). The existing IP systems have been developed based upon the principles of human authorship and human invention; this has created barriers to the recognition of AI-generated outputs as IP under the current IP frameworks of copyright, design and patent. Through a careful examination of relevant judicial decisions (e.g., Thaler v. Vidal and Naruto v. Slater) and the provisions of Indian law (i.e., Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak), it is evident that there are significant limitations to what the existing IP framework can offer to protect AI-generated outputs. A comparison of the different ways in which AI is legally recognized in the U.S., UK, EU, and India shows a lack of recognition across all jurisdictions of AI as an author or inventor. This article has noted that there are still many unanswered questions regarding things like ownership, originality and liability as they relate to intellectual property rights (IPRs), and it has suggested that there is a need for an adaptable and flexible law regime (including a new type of protection – sui generis), to cover these areas. The article concludes that without speedy changes to existing IPR laws, they will become inadequate because of developments associated with artificial intelligence.