CHINA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Binxin Li, Sally Wang, Guangzhen Shang and Yue He, LeanWill Law Firm
records to prove individualised aesthetic choices and substantive creative contributions to the AIGC. Failure to provide such records, or an inability to reproduce the same outputs using the same prompts, undermine the claims of authorship and hence copyrightability. This stricter approach has been echoed in subsequent decisions. In September 2025, the Beijing Internet Court rejected a copyright claim for an AIGC due to the plaintiff’s failure to provide complete generation records, while the Shanghai Huangpu District People’s Court (November 2025) held that unstructured, list-like prompts constitute mere “ideas” rather than original expression eligible for copyright protection. In summary, Chinese courts have shifted from acknowledging basic human selection and direc- tion as sufficient for copyright protection of AIGC to demanding verifiable, substantive human creative control and rigorous creation records as essential prerequisites for copyright protection. This evolution reflects an effort to balance technological innovation in the AIGC field and the protection of genuine human authorship. Legal liability of GenAI service providers Chinese courts have also issued a series of landmark rulings clarifying the copyright liability rules for gen- erative AI (“GenAI”) platform operators and the appli- cation of the fair use doctrine in AIGC-related copy- right disputes. Through three representative cases, the courts have established consistent and industry- oriented judicial principles for the copyright liability of GenAI service providers. In the Fights Break Sphere Medusa case adjudicated by the Shanghai Jinshan District People’s Court on 3 November 2025 (the judgment is not yet publicly avail- able), the court held the user liable for direct copyright infringement, while absolving the AI platform of liability on the grounds that the platform had fulfilled its duty of care by establishing a complaint mechanism and incorporating IP protection clauses into its user agree- ments, and there was no evidence of subjective fault on the part of the platform. In contrast, in the Ultraman second-instance case ruled by the Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court on 30 December 2024 ((2024) Zhe 01 Min Zhong No
10332), the platform was found liable for contributory infringement. The court held that the platform had con- structive knowledge of users’ infringing LoRA model training activities but failed to take effective preven- tive and remedial measures. Accordingly, the court ordered the platform to pay a total of RMB30,000 in damages and reasonable expenses. Earlier, in the Ultraman AI Painting case adjudicated by the Guangzhou Internet Court on 8 February 2024 ((2024) Yue 0192 Min Chu No 113), the court imposed direct infringement liability on the platform, reason- ing that the system had autonomously generated infringing Ultraman images in response to user inputs, ordering the platform to cease infringement and pay RMB10,000 in damages. Based on these precedents, Chinese courts have for- mulated several guiding judicial principles to balance the development of the GenAI industry and the pro- tection of copyright rights: • GenAI platforms are generally not subject to direct infringement liability for user-generated content, unless the platforms provide infringing training data, exercise direct control over the content gen- eration process, or collude with users. • There is no general obligation to pre-review user prompts or training data, as such requirements would impose excessive burdens on platform oper- ators and hinder technological innovation. • Subjective fault serves as the prerequisite for the assumption of contributory liability by GenAI platforms – ie, platforms are only held account- able if they actually know or should have known of the users’ infringing acts but fail to take timely and effective remedial measures. Commercial GenAI platforms may be subject to a higher duty of care in IP protection. • The training of GenAI models may constitute fair use under the China Copyright Law provided that: the use is transformative, with reasonable quantity, and does not impair the legitimate market value or commercial exploitation of the original works.
55 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook