Supreme People's Court issues judicial opinions on AI-related disputes

The archive provides Chinese and English research texts. Translations may be AI-assisted and may not yet have received independent human review. Consult the original-language sources alongside them.

The Supreme People's Court issued Fa Fa [2026] No. 10, addressing synthetic voices identifying natural persons, liability for generated infringing content, evidence for developers' non-infringement defences and protection of lawful data interests.

Image published with “Supreme People's Court opinions on adjudicating AI-related disputes in accordance with law”. Its creation date is not inferred from the event date in this record.
Image source: Supreme People's Court; rights remain with the original rights holders.
Source · Supreme People's Court opinions on adjudicating AI-related disputes in accordance with law ↗

Sources read · Research in progress

What changed

RESEARCH NOTE

Only institutional provisions relevant to artistic creation are included. This is not described as a new law banning all AI training, nor are training-evidence requirements expanded into a duty for every model to disclose all data.

Editorial research question

Editorial interpretation: institutional comparison connecting imitation of natural persons' voices, evidence in generated-content infringement and data interests; it does not replace records of artists' actions.

This is an editorial interpretation or question, separate from factual statements.

Evidence & sources

SRC-0242

Body lines 52–91, particularly provisions 4, 12, 16 and 17; publication date at line 25.

SRC-0242

Supreme People's Court opinions on adjudicating AI-related disputes in accordance with law

Supreme People's Court · ZH · 2026-09-07

Case

CASE-0141Supreme People's Court: 2026 judicial opinions on AI disputes

Cite this record

ANTI-AI ARCHIVE. “Supreme People's Court issues judicial opinions on AI-related disputes.” evt-0235. Include this page’s URL and your access date when citing.