Chinese and English archive texts include AI-assisted translations, not independently human-reviewed. Consult the original-language sources alongside them.
The report states that the defendant appealed and then applied to withdraw; the appellate court allowed withdrawal, and the judgment became final.
What changed
The report states that the defendant appealed and then applied to withdraw; the appellate court allowed withdrawal, and the judgment became final.
The event date is public disclosure, not the date of finality. It must not be described as first confirmed on 11 September, affirmed on the merits at second instance or finally adjudicated that day. The precise date of the withdrawal order was not verified.
Editorial research question
Editorial interpretation: distinguish voice performers' personality interests, game characters' commercial identification and operators' competitive interests; one judgment does not establish absolute exclusive rights over every fictional voice.
This is an editorial interpretation or question, separate from factual statements.
Evidence & sources
The report states that the defendant appealed and then applied to withdraw; the appellate court allowed withdrawal, and the judgment became final.
SRC-0241Lines 24–39: press conference, 63 character offerings, first-instance ruling on 30 June and finality after withdrawal of the appeal.
The Paper / Li Jing · ZH · 2026-09-10
Case
Related documents
DOC-0229Shanghai's first AI voice-imitation unfair competition case: AI-replicated game-character voices sold, RMB 750,000 awardedCite this record
ANTI-AI ARCHIVE. “Pudong court press conference discloses finality of the Genshin voice judgment.” evt-0234. Include this page’s URL and your access date when citing.