In the age of digitalizarion several new ways of creating immaterial property have sprung up due to the resurgence of artificial intelligence (AI). This has paved the way for different kinds of tech including the assistance of AI in a more normalized way. A prominent variation of this tech is called "deepfake". Deepfakes are a technology that essentially places your face, likeness, mannerisms, and voice onto new situations that the creator then steers to make the deepfake do or say things that the person whose deepfake is based on hasn't done or said. This technology has been used in a myriad of ways, all from humourous content to extorsion and revenge porn. The aim of this master thesis is to analyse how immaterial law protection is achieved through current Swedish immaterial law principles and how these fit within the context of heavily based AI-tech such as deepfakes. This is done through a dogmatic lens, meaning that a systematization and mapping of both Swedish and EU-based laws and praxis are done as well as discussing the current thoughts on AI-assistance throughout the creative process. Another subject that is touched upon is the parody exception in immaterial law and the concept of adaptation and how these work with and apply to AI-based creations. Part of the problems that we face right now is that we have no existing legal parameters to solve the problem of larger AI-involvement in creative processes, this is certainly going to change how we view copyright law today. When comparing and using EU as well as Swedish praxis to analyze the AI-problem a common denominator is that all copyright law and praxis is based around the presumption that there needs to be a human involved in the majority of the creative process. AI already exists as a part of many creative processes today without any questions asked, however when the AI-part is more significant in the process the question becomes complicated when paired with traditional copyright law perspectives. However, some discussions have been going on in both Swedish and EU legal spheres, mostly in the EU who are going to legislate more in the field of AI. In Sweden there have been no legislative processes when it comes to AI in copyright law however there have been some governmental organisations and essays that have shed a light on the matter. I conclude this master thesis by writing about the findings of each question as has been mentioned above, namely that AI becomes a significant factor in deciding if a deepfake achieves copyright protection or not and the same can be said about parodies. After this I make a concluding analysis of the urgency of a need for laws that tackle AI in the area of immaterial laws listing other areas that might need it more than immaterial laws as has been explored throughout this thesis as well and that Sweden needs to take part in every discussion about this to form a sustainable legal framework for AIs in the context of immaterial laws. This will open up for a clear framework when assessing different technologies that use AI like deepfakes as well.