模仿公众人物声音的"AI语音包"在网络平台热销；自动生成的"数字人"在直播间滔滔不绝；已故人物的 音容笑貌被"数字复活"……数字时代，人工智能技术可以模仿、复制甚至"创造"一个人的声音、形象乃 至人格片段，那么，如何更好守护"独一无二"的人格权益？ 司法实践承担着先行探索的任务。一些司法裁判认定，自然人声音权益可及于AI生成声音，利用AI软 件制作他人"数字虚拟人"形象或恶搞、丑化他人肖像均构成肖像权侵权，对包含他人肖像的视频进 行"AI换脸"，构成对他人个人信息权益的侵害。 这些探索传递出清晰信号：技术应用只要实质性地构成对人格权的侵害，就应受到法律的规制和惩戒。 面对不断涌现的新技术形态，需要在既有法律框架下，从具体案例中总结提炼裁判规则，不断明确新型 侵权行为的判断标准，确保技术创新始终在尊重人格权的轨道上进行。 强化数字时代的人格权保护，应注重多元利益衡量，促进人格权与技术创新的良性互动。例如，对 于"数字复活"技术，往往交织着多重诉求：对逝者的尊重、亲属的情感、研究者的探索、商业开发的价 值乃至公众的历史记忆。法治的意义在于合理区分场景、清晰界定规则。对于直接用于诽谤等恶意侵害 人格尊严的行为，必须 ...

赵某多次劝阻无效后，诉至昌邑法院，要求王某在微信群内道歉、赔偿精神损害抚慰金2000元及律师费 5000元。被告王某则辩称，相关言论未指名道姓，且系因赵某先动手打人引发，否认侵权。 02 法院审理 网络空间并非法外之地，一言一行均需谨慎。近日，吉林市昌邑区人民法院审理了一起人格权纠纷案 件，被告王某因在微信群内多次发表辱骂、诽谤言论，被判在涉案群内公开道歉。本案的判决再次警 示：网络不是"法外之地"，利用社交平台侵害他人权益，必将承担法律责任。 01 案情回顾 原告赵某与被告王某原系吉林市某工厂同事，退休后同在退休同事的微信群内，群成员有26人。2022年 以来，王某因琐事对赵某产生不满，不仅多次在群外散布关于赵某妻子的谣言，更于2024年6月至12月 期间，在微信群内持续发布带有侮辱性词汇的言论，对赵某及其家人进行辱骂和人身攻击，内容涉及捏 造私生活混乱、贬低人格尊严等，引发群友猜测。 法院经审理查明，涉案微信群成员均为原同事，被告王某公开发布的词汇结合上下文及双方矛盾，明显 指向赵某；其言论中包含大量侮辱性、诽谤性内容，已超出正常言论范畴，构成对赵某人格权的侵害。 根据《中华人民共和国民法典》第九百九十五 ...

Core Viewpoint - The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, such as AI photo editing and deepfake tools, has raised significant legal concerns regarding the protection of personal rights, particularly in cases of unauthorized use of individuals' images and the blurring of lines between reality and fiction [1][8]. Group 1: Case Overview - The case involves a dispute between two members of a photography group, where the defendant used AI to create and share altered images of the plaintiff without consent, leading to claims of infringement on the plaintiff's portrait rights, reputation, and general personality rights [2][3]. - The court's ruling provided clear guidance on the legal boundaries of portrait rights, reputation rights, and the application of general personality rights in the context of AI-generated content [8][9]. Group 2: Legal Findings - The court determined that the defendant's group sharing of altered images constituted an infringement of the plaintiff's portrait and reputation rights, as the images were recognizable and had a degrading effect on the plaintiff's social standing [5][6][14]. - The private messaging behavior of the defendant did not infringe on the plaintiff's portrait or reputation rights but was found to violate general personality rights due to the humiliating nature of the images sent [7][12]. Group 3: Judicial Implications - The case highlights the need for clear standards regarding the "recognizability" of AI-generated images in legal contexts, emphasizing that even altered images can be deemed recognizable if they can be identified by the audience [9]. - The court's recognition of the sensitive nature of female representation in media and its implications for reputation rights reflects a broader commitment to protecting individual dignity and rights in the face of technological advancements [10][15]. - The application of general personality rights in this case serves as a precedent for future cases involving AI-generated content, ensuring comprehensive protection of individual rights beyond specific categories [11][13].

Core Viewpoint - The Beijing Internet Court ruled that a technology company is liable for infringing on the personality rights of a public figure by allowing users to create a virtual AI companion using the figure's name and likeness without permission [2][5]. Group 1: Case Background - The defendant, an AI technology company, developed a mobile accounting app that allows users to create an "AI companion" by setting names, avatars, and relationships [2]. - A public figure, referred to as He, was extensively used by users as a companion character, with many uploading images of He to set as the avatar [2][3]. Group 2: Court's Findings - The court found that the defendant's actions constituted an infringement of He’s name rights, portrait rights, and general personality rights [3][4]. - The software's design and algorithms encouraged users to create infringing content, thus the defendant was not merely a neutral service provider but a content service provider responsible for the infringement [4][5]. Group 3: Legal Implications - The court mandated the defendant to publicly apologize and compensate for both emotional and economic damages [5]. - This case highlights the importance of protecting personality rights and establishes that service providers who actively participate in the creation of infringing content can be held liable [5].

Core Insights - Artificial intelligence is becoming a significant driving force behind a new wave of technological revolution and industrial transformation, fundamentally altering production methods, lifestyles, and social governance [1] - The development of large AI models requires vast amounts of data, which raises concerns about the protection of personal information rights and presents new challenges to the personal rights system [1] Group 1: Protection and Utilization of Publicly Available Personal Information - The protection of publicly available personal information is increasingly important in the training of AI models, as much of the training data comes from such sources [1] - The Personal Information Protection Law in China allows for the processing of publicly available personal information without consent, provided it meets certain conditions, including reasonable scope and significant impact on personal rights [1] - The challenge arises when AI models collect fragmented personal information, potentially leading to the reconstruction of sensitive personal data, which necessitates obtaining consent [1] Group 2: Safeguarding Sensitive Personal Information - The advancement of AI technology enhances data analysis capabilities, posing new threats to personal information security, particularly sensitive data [2] - During the training phase of generative AI, it is crucial to anonymize sensitive personal information to prevent severe consequences from potential leaks [2] - Historical incidents, such as vulnerabilities in ChatGPT, highlight the risks associated with sensitive information exposure and the need for ongoing regulatory measures [2] Group 3: Challenges in Generative AI Operations - Generative AI poses significant challenges to the protection of personal privacy and information, necessitating measures to prevent sensitive data from being included in generated content [3] - The risk of generative AI producing malicious or false content is a concern, as inaccuracies in training data can lead to harmful outputs that may relate to sensitive personal information [3] - The importance of protecting personal identifiers, such as voice, is increasingly recognized due to the potential for deepfake technology to exploit these identifiers [3] Group 4: Protection of Personal Identifiers - The rise of deepfake technology allows for the creation of fraudulent audio and visual content, posing significant risks to individuals [4] - High-profile cases, such as the exploitation of Scarlett Johansson's voice by OpenAI, underscore the urgent need for legal protections against the misuse of personal identifiers [4] - The necessity for stricter regulations to prevent the infringement of personal rights through deepfake technology is becoming more apparent [4] Group 5: Virtual Digital Humans and Personal Rights - The emergence of virtual digital humans presents new challenges to the personal rights system, particularly regarding the use of real individuals' likenesses in creating virtual representations [5] - The commercial viability of virtual digital humans is being explored, but their interaction with the real world raises questions about potential violations of personal rights [5] - The determination of whether a virtual digital human infringes on an individual's rights hinges on the recognizable similarity to the real person, necessitating legal standards for assessment [5] Group 6: New Types of Personal Rights - Virtual digital humans can act as "virtual avatars," extending beyond traditional rights to encompass new forms of personal rights [6] - Legal interpretations are evolving to recognize that the use of real personal information in training AI companions can infringe upon various personal rights, including name and likeness rights [6] - The concept of a "virtual avatar" represents a composite of an individual's identity, necessitating the establishment of new legal protections for these emerging personal rights [6]

Core Viewpoint - The rise of AI technology has enabled the cloning of specific individuals' voices, leading to potential legal and ethical concerns regarding the use of these cloned voices for commercial purposes [1][2]. Group 1: AI Voice Cloning Technology - AI voice cloning allows for the creation of highly realistic imitations of individuals' voices, which can be used in various applications, including marketing and live interactions [1]. - The process of cloning requires a sample of the individual's voice, raising concerns about the infringement of personal voice rights [2]. Group 2: Legal and Ethical Implications - Voice is recognized as an important personal right, similar to name, image, and privacy rights, and is protected under civil law [1]. - The first legal case regarding AI-generated voice rights established that using an individual's voice for AI processing requires legal authorization from the individual [1][2]. Group 3: Regulatory Measures - There is a need for improved legislation to prevent unauthorized AI voice cloning, including the establishment of auxiliary regulations to create a comprehensive legal framework [2]. - The National Internet Information Office has issued guidelines requiring service providers to label AI-generated content, which aims to mitigate misuse at the source [2]. Group 4: Enforcement Actions - Increased enforcement efforts are necessary to combat illegal activities related to AI voice cloning, including the deployment of special actions to address the misuse of AI technology [3]. - It is essential to hold online platforms accountable for monitoring and regulating content to protect individual rights effectively [3].

Core Viewpoint - The rapid development of new technologies, particularly AI, necessitates a robust legal framework to protect individual rights and ensure the responsible use of these technologies in society [1][2][4]. Group 1: Legal Framework and Protection of Rights - The implementation of the Civil Code and Criminal Law Amendment (Nine) addresses the need for a comprehensive system to protect personal rights, including privacy and reputation [1][2]. - The courts are actively applying legal provisions to strengthen the protection of personality rights in cases involving the infringement of rights through the use of network and information technology [1][3]. Group 2: Case Summaries and Implications - Case 1 highlights that unauthorized publication of bounty advertisements for criminal information can constitute defamation, emphasizing the need for legitimate purposes in such advertisements [5][6]. - Case 2 demonstrates that unauthorized AI processing of an individual's voice constitutes an infringement of personality rights, reinforcing the legal protection of voice as a personal right [9][10][11]. - Case 3 illustrates that using someone's likeness for "face-swapping" without consent is a violation of portrait rights, stressing the importance of consent in the use of personal images [12][13][14]. - Case 4 shows that inciting online harassment through social media can infringe on an individual's reputation, highlighting the responsibility of account holders to manage their accounts legally [15][16][17]. - Case 5 indicates that the illegal sale of personal facial information can lead to criminal charges, underlining the legal consequences of violating personal information rights [18][20][21]. - Case 6 reveals that illegally controlling home surveillance systems constitutes a serious violation of privacy and information security, emphasizing the need for stringent legal measures against such actions [22][23][24].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the significance of the Civil Code in protecting the legal rights of civil subjects in China, marking its fifth anniversary since implementation, and highlights its role as a comprehensive legal framework for social life [2][6]. Group 1: Characteristics of the Civil Code - The Civil Code exhibits three main characteristics: targeting, seriousness, and extensibility [3][6]. - Targeting: It provides detailed regulations on personal rights, property rights, and personality rights, establishing a protection logic from birth to death [3]. - Seriousness: The Civil Code demonstrates rigidity in judicial processes, exemplified by a landmark case where a party was ordered to pay 640 million yuan for intellectual property infringement, showcasing the importance of strict intellectual property protection for innovation [4]. - Extensibility: The Civil Code serves as a foundational law that promotes the completeness of the legal system, with new laws like the Private Economy Promotion Law reinforcing its principles [5]. Group 2: Implementation and Impact - The implementation of the Civil Code has led to significant legal outcomes, with over 804,100 cases of personality rights disputes resolved by courts since its enactment [3]. - The Civil Code's independent chapter on personality rights reflects a shift towards comprehensive protection of individual dignity and rights, addressing the evolving needs of society [4][6]. - The ongoing development of specific laws indicates that legal frameworks must adapt to changing circumstances and emerging issues, highlighting the need for a balance between public and private rights [5].

Core Viewpoint - The Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, celebrated its fifth anniversary, has significantly enhanced the protection of civil rights and interests, establishing itself as a comprehensive legal framework for social life [2][6]. Group 1: Characteristics of the Civil Code - The Civil Code exhibits three main characteristics: targeting, seriousness, and extensibility [3]. - Targeting: It provides detailed regulations on personal rights, property rights, and personality rights, establishing a clear framework for rights protection from birth to death [3]. - Seriousness: The Civil Code has shown rigidity in judicial processes, exemplified by a landmark case where a party was ordered to pay 640 million yuan for intellectual property infringement, marking the highest compensation in this field [4]. - Extensibility: The Civil Code serves as a foundational law that promotes the completeness of the legal system, with new laws like the Private Economy Promotion Law enhancing its principles [4][5]. Group 2: Legal Protections and Developments - The Private Economy Promotion Law protects the personal and property rights of private economic organizations and their operators, ensuring that their rights cannot be infringed upon [5]. - The ongoing development of specific laws, despite the clarity of the Civil Code, indicates the evolving nature of legal challenges and the need for continuous legal advancements [5]. - The emphasis on private rights protection, equality, and good faith reflects the Civil Code's role as a fundamental law in the market economy, providing essential guidelines for law enforcement [6].

Group 1 - The Supreme People's Court continues to implement typical cases of the Civil Code, focusing on protecting intellectual property rights and supporting the development of new productive forces, which aims to enhance the quality of economic and social development [1] - The case involving the unauthorized use of a person's voice highlights the legal recognition of voice as a personal right, establishing boundaries for new business models and technologies [2] - A case regarding malicious defamation by a customer against a business demonstrates the legal recourse available for businesses to protect their reputation and seek damages for harm caused by false statements [3] Group 2 - Additional typical cases include those related to the infringement of trade secrets in the electric vehicle chassis technology and civil public interest litigation concerning ecological damage, indicating a broader application of the Civil Code in various sectors [4]