Zhou v. (Beijing Internet Court, 2025)

Protection of AI output

Can AI-generated work be protected?

Human authors only

Claim lost: the creative process could not be proven

Holding

The court accepted that AI-generated images can be protected but ruled against a claimant who offered only after-the-fact re-creations instead of original generation records. Authors must show their creative thinking, prompts and selection.

Same court as Li v. Liu, stricter on evidence: protection depends on records you keep at the time.

Principles it bears on

• SupportsCopyright needs a human author; protection follows human creative input, not the machine.
• SupportsTo claim rights in AI-assisted work, you must be able to show your creative process.

Sources

No official text linked yet: this summary relies on a secondary source. Verify against the original before citing.