Core Viewpoint - The rise of AI-generated "New Year greetings" featuring celebrities has sparked discussions about the legal boundaries and potential infringements on rights associated with unauthorized use of likenesses and voices [1][5]. Group 1: AI Technology in New Year Greetings - AI technology is being utilized to create engaging short videos featuring familiar celebrities, athletes, and historical figures, which has become popular on social media platforms as the Spring Festival approaches [1][2]. - The core technology behind these videos includes deep synthesis techniques, specifically visual synthesis (deep fake) and voice synthesis, which together create realistic AI-generated content [3][4]. Group 2: Legal and Compliance Concerns - There are significant concerns regarding the compliance and safety of deep synthesis videos, particularly regarding the unauthorized use of individuals' likenesses and voices, which can infringe on personal rights [5][6]. - The Chinese Civil Code explicitly protects portrait and voice rights, and unauthorized deep synthesis can violate these rights, potentially leading to defamation or copyright infringement [6][7]. Group 3: Industry Response and Regulation - Some AI service platforms are implementing measures to prevent misuse, such as mandatory AI-generated content labels and user agreements prohibiting unauthorized use of likenesses and voices [7]. - There is a call for network platforms to take responsibility for managing the production and dissemination of such content, including establishing comprehensive management mechanisms and responding promptly to infringement notifications [7].

报告指出，上述案件为规范电商推广行为、压实商家主体责任、治理AI"声替"乱象提供规则指引，积极 推动人工智能与深度合成技术向上向善发展。 北京市人民检察院检察长朱雅频作北京市人民检察院工作报告时还提到，北京突出全球数字经济标杆城 市建设需求，惩治侵犯数据权益犯罪108件。东城区人民检察院办理全市首例非法删除人工智能模型训 练数据案，推动人工智能模型训练系统纳入刑法保护的"计算机信息系统"。 其中，AI生成声音带货案入选2025年电子商务法领域年度十大典型案例。该案中，原告李某在教育、 育儿领域具有一定知名度和社会影响力。2024年，李某发现被告某公司在网店销售家庭教育类图书过程 中，使用李某公开演讲、授课视频，并配以与李某声音高度近似的AI合成声音。 北京互联网法院经审理依法认定，未经权利人许可使用AI合成的名人声音用于带货构成侵权，委托推 广商家应承担连带责任。 中国青年报客户端北京1月27日电（中青报·中青网记者 尹希宁）"AI生成声音带货""虚拟数字人形象侵 权""变身漫画特效不正当竞争""非法抓取网络平台数据集合"等有重要影响的新类型案件写入北京市高 级人民法院报告。 上述非法删除人工智能模型训练数据 ...

Core Viewpoint - The importance of data security and personal information protection is emphasized, highlighting the need for a comprehensive system involving all societal stakeholders to safeguard personal information rights and promote efficient data circulation to empower the real economy [1][2]. Group 1: Data Security and Personal Information Protection - The misuse of personal information can lead to significant damage to individual rights and disrupt market order and social trust [1]. - The rise of mimetic advertising, which blends seamlessly into users' daily information streams, raises concerns about data security and personal information protection [1][2]. - There is a need for a collaborative governance mechanism to ensure data security and personal information rights are effectively protected in the digital economy [2][3]. Group 2: Regulation and Compliance - Establishing clear personal information processing rules for platforms is essential, with an emphasis on the "notice-consent" principle to protect citizens' rights [3]. - Platforms must limit personal information collection to the minimum necessary for achieving processing purposes and ensure that the processing is relevant and minimally impactful on individual rights [3]. - Platforms are urged to take on high compliance standards and not overlook personal information protection for profit, especially in the context of mimetic advertising [4]. Group 3: Technological Advancements and Risks - The application of emerging technologies like generative AI and deep synthesis in information dissemination presents diverse and hidden risks of personal information leakage and misuse [4]. - Platforms should conduct preemptive reviews and safety assessments of data usage involving personal information to ensure compliance with safety standards [4]. - It is crucial to clearly distinguish between synthetic and real information in advertising content to prevent misleading users and protect their personal information [4].

Core Viewpoint - The emergence of AI technologies, such as Sora 2, which generates videos featuring deceased celebrities, raises significant ethical and legal concerns regarding the unauthorized use of likenesses and personal data of the deceased [3][12]. Group 1: Invasion of Personality Rights - The unauthorized use of deceased individuals' likenesses for commercial purposes constitutes a clear violation of personality rights, as their images are protected by law even after death [4]. - The generated content often distorts the public image of the deceased, leading to potential claims for emotional damages from their relatives due to the infringement of dignity and respect [5]. Group 2: Data Compliance Issues - The creation of "resurrected" videos relies on the illegal use of deceased individuals' biometric data, such as facial features and voice patterns, without the consent of their heirs, violating personal information protection laws [6]. - The lack of proper oversight by technology companies regarding the legality of training data used for AI models raises concerns about shared liability for infringements [8]. Group 3: Copyright Infringement Risks - The original materials used to create the videos, such as film clips and recordings, are often still under copyright protection, and their unauthorized use constitutes a derivative work violation [8]. - If technology providers fail to implement effective copyright filtering mechanisms, they may face indirect infringement liabilities, especially if they are aware of the infringing content [9]. Group 4: Legal Outcomes and Family Rights - Legal precedents suggest that families of deceased celebrities have a high probability of winning lawsuits against companies like OpenAI for unauthorized use of likenesses and personal data [10]. - The potential defenses that OpenAI might raise, such as the "historical figure exception," lack legal grounding and may not withstand scrutiny in light of existing laws protecting personality rights [11]. Conclusion - The controversy surrounding Sora 2 highlights the clash between technological advancements and ethical/legal boundaries, emphasizing the need for updated regulations to protect the dignity of the deceased [12].