北京互联网法院发布涉AI案件典型案例，推动司法理念守正创新

Core Insights - The Beijing Internet Court has reported a significant increase in AI-related cases over the past seven years, highlighting the rapid growth of disputes in areas such as copyright, personality rights, and network service contracts [1][2] Group 1: Case Statistics and Trends - The court has accepted over 250,000 cases and concluded more than 240,000 cases in total, with AI-related disputes showing a notable increase [1] - The types of disputes are primarily focused on copyright ownership and infringement, network liability, and network service contracts, with a notable penetration into traditional industries like entertainment, finance, and advertising [1] Group 2: Notable Cases - The first national case of "AI-generated image" involved the plaintiff using the Stable Diffusion model to create images, which were then used without attribution by the defendant. The court recognized the images as artistic works and ruled in favor of the plaintiff [2] - In an "AI face-swapping case," the court found that while the defendant did not infringe on the plaintiff's portrait rights, the unauthorized use of facial information constituted an invasion of personal information rights [2] - A case involving the unauthorized sale of virtual digital characters led to the court recognizing the originality of the characters and ruling against the defendant for infringing on the information network dissemination rights [2] - The court also addressed the use of AI-generated celebrity voices in marketing, establishing that recognizable AI-generated voices fall under the protection of personal rights [2] Group 3: Judicial Challenges and Principles - The court faces challenges in adjudicating AI cases due to the complexity of technology, insufficient legal frameworks, and the diverse roles of AI industry participants, which complicate responsibility determinations [3] - The Beijing Internet Court emphasizes the importance of protecting fundamental human rights while promoting the development and governance of AI technology through judicial rulings [3]