Chinese Court Rules AI Prompts Not Copyrightable Due to Lack of Originality
The Huangpu District People’s Court in Shanghai, China, has issued a significant ruling stating that artificial intelligence prompts do not qualify as copyrightable works under current law. The case involved a visual art company that created six sets of prompts for use with the AI image generator Midjourney. The court determined that these prompts lacked the necessary originality and individuality to be considered protected artistic expressions. Instead, the judges classified the prompts as abstract creative ideas and instructions, rather than concrete expressions reflecting personal judgment. Consequently, the court dismissed all claims filed by the plaintiff against two defendants who were accused of using similar prompts to generate images on the social media platform Xiaohongshu and in other published materials. This decision highlights the ongoing legal challenges surrounding intellectual property rights in the age of generative AI, specifically distinguishing between unprotected ideas and protected expressions. The ruling serves as a precedent for how Chinese courts may handle future disputes involving AI-generated content and the specific inputs used to create them, emphasizing the threshold of human creativity required for copyright protection.
Wire timeline
Chinese Court Rules AI Prompts Not Copyrightable Due to Lack of Originality
The Huangpu District People’s Court in Shanghai, China, has issued a significant ruling stating that artificial intelligence prompts do not qualify as copyrightable works under current law. The case involved a visual art company that created six sets of prompts for use with the AI image generator Midjourney. The court determined that these prompts lacked the necessary originality and individuality to be considered protected artistic expressions. Instead, the judges classified the prompts as abstract creative ideas and instructions, rather than concrete expressions reflecting personal judgment. Consequently, the court dismissed all claims filed by the plaintiff against two defendants who were accused of using similar prompts to generate images on the social media platform Xiaohongshu and in other published materials. This decision highlights the ongoing legal challenges surrounding intellectual property rights in the age of generative AI, specifically distinguishing between unprotected ideas and protected expressions. The ruling serves as a precedent for how Chinese courts may handle future disputes involving AI-generated content and the specific inputs used to create them, emphasizing the threshold of human creativity required for copyright protection.
TechNode