Core Viewpoint - Shanghai is positioning itself as a leader in innovation and technology, focusing on the development of strategic emerging industries as part of the national economic strategy during the "14th Five-Year Plan" [1][10]. Group 1: Strategic Emerging Industries - The development of strategic emerging industries aims to cultivate new growth engines in cutting-edge fields, aligning with the national economic strategy outlined in the "14th Five-Year Plan" [1]. - By 2024, the added value of strategic emerging industries in Shanghai is projected to reach 12,533 billion, accounting for 23.2% of the city's GDP, with key sectors like integrated circuits, biomedicine, and artificial intelligence exceeding 1.8 trillion [3]. Group 2: Intellectual Property Protection - Shanghai courts have expanded their focus from knowledge property protection to comprehensive innovation development protection, creating a legal environment conducive to the growth of strategic emerging industries [1][3]. - During the "14th Five-Year Plan" period, Shanghai courts accepted 234,000 intellectual property cases and concluded 229,000, emphasizing the importance of protecting technological innovation and the legitimate rights of innovators [3]. Group 3: Case Studies and Judicial Innovations - A notable case involved a former COO of a chip company who was found guilty of stealing trade secrets related to AI chips, highlighting the judiciary's role in protecting corporate innovation [2]. - The Shanghai courts have implemented innovative judicial measures, such as the "cost method" for assessing damages in technology leak cases, and have facilitated mediation to resolve disputes [2][3]. Group 4: AI and Digital Transformation - The rise of AI technologies has prompted the judiciary to address challenges related to intellectual property and market competition, ensuring that AI applications do not infringe on others' rights [6][7]. - Shanghai courts have developed 136 application scenarios for intellectual property trials, enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of judicial processes in the digital age [8]. Group 5: International Cooperation and Confidence - The Shanghai courts have demonstrated a commitment to protecting the legitimate rights of both domestic and foreign enterprises, fostering an environment of trust for international businesses [9][10]. - The courts have actively engaged in high-profile cases involving global brands, reinforcing Shanghai's position as a preferred venue for resolving international intellectual property disputes [10].

Core Viewpoint - The case highlights the intersection of AI technology and copyright law, focusing on the unauthorized use of original video content by a company using AI face-swapping technology, raising questions about originality and copyright infringement [2][4][6]. Group 1: Case Background - A photographer discovered that her original videos were used in an AI face-swapping app called "某颜" without her permission, leading her to file a lawsuit for copyright infringement [1][2]. - The app, developed by a company, utilized AI algorithms to create face-swapped videos, which included many elements identical to the photographer's original works [2][3]. Group 2: Legal Considerations - The court recognized the photographer's original videos as protected works under copyright law due to their originality in content arrangement, camera angles, and other creative aspects [3][4]. - The defendant argued that the AI-generated videos were sufficiently different from the originals, but the court maintained that the core elements of the original works remained intact, constituting substantial similarity [3][6]. Group 3: Copyright and Commercial Use - The case raised complex legal questions regarding the commercial use of AI-generated content and the responsibilities of platforms in such scenarios [4][5]. - The company was found to have violated copyright laws by using the original works for profit without proper authorization, thus breaching the rights of the original creator [5][6]. Group 4: Platform Liability - The company attempted to invoke the "safe harbor" principle, claiming limited liability as a platform provider, but the court ruled that they failed to exercise reasonable care in monitoring the content [8][9]. - The court emphasized that platforms cannot ignore obvious copyright infringements and must take appropriate actions when notified [8][9]. Group 5: Industry Implications - The case serves as a cautionary tale for small tech companies about the importance of understanding copyright laws and the potential legal ramifications of using AI technologies [9][10]. - The court suggested that the company enhance its compliance awareness and improve its content review processes to avoid future legal issues [9][10].