Chinese and English archive texts include AI-assisted translations, not independently human-reviewed. Consult the original-language sources alongside them.
The Zhangjiagang court published the Feng case, selected among Suzhou courts’ 2025 exemplary cases, with first- and second-instance case numbers. Its summary explains that missing original generation records made personalized intellectual contribution difficult to prove, and that the accused product’s specific expression differed; the plaintiff’s requests were rejected.
What changed
The Zhangjiagang court published the Feng case, selected among Suzhou courts’ 2025 exemplary cases, with first- and second-instance case numbers. Its summary explains that missing original generation records made personalized intellectual contribution difficult to prove, and that the accused product’s specific expression differed; the plaintiff’s requests were rejected.
This event is the 2026 exemplary-case publication, not the judgment date. The court summary says the appeal was withdrawn and judgment became effective; a 2025 report cites failure to pay appeal fees on time, with procedural details awaiting the original ruling. It is not a categorical denial of copyright in all AI images. The summary alone does not justify adding a first-instance judgment event with an unknown exact date.
Editorial research question
Editorial interpretation: institutional context involving an AI user’s claimed rights in design images, highlighting proof of creative process and the transition from images to industrial products. This is not an artists’ anti-AI protest.
This is an editorial interpretation or question, separate from factual statements.
Evidence & sources
The Zhangjiagang court published the Feng case, selected among Suzhou courts’ 2025 exemplary cases, with first- and second-instance case numbers. Its summary explains that missing original generation records made personalized intellectual contribution difficult to prove, and that the accused product’s specific expression differed; the plaintiff’s requests were rejected.
SRC-0212Lines 3–9: publisher and date; lines 54–75: Feng case index, facts, reasoning, and brief appeal account.
Material relevant to this case; see the locator for the precise scope read.
SRC-0213Title date and lines 10–14: unpaid appeal fees, 2023 publication, and challenged promotion in 2024.
Zhangjiagang People’s Court official account on The Paper · ZH · 2026-04-22
Legal Daily / Republication by Tibet Cyberspace Administration · ZH · 2025-04-23
Case
Related documents
DOC-0200Two cases selected as Suzhou courts’ 2025 exemplary intellectual-property protection casesDOC-0201Simple prompts plus AI generation do not constitute a work: judgment takes effect in reported first such text-to-image caseCite this record
ANTI-AI ARCHIVE. “Zhangjiagang court publishes exemplary-case account of transparent butterfly chair dispute.” evt-0213. Include this page’s URL and your access date when citing.