[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, the key issue is whether it reflects human intellectual input and personalized choices. China's Copyright Law protects intellectual achievements in the fields of literature, art, and science that are original and can be expressed in a certain form. If the user merely inputs simple prompts and the output is automatically generated by artificial intelligence, it is usually difficult to identify it as a work and claim copyright; if the user has invested substantial intellectual labor in prompt design, parameter adjustment, multiple rounds of generation and screening modifications, and the generated results reflect their personalized choices and arrangements, there is a possibility that it will be recognized as a work and protected. In practice, the conclusion varies from case to case. It is recommended to keep records of the creative process and stipulate ownership in the contract, rather than assuming that "whoever generates it owns it".

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

Artificial intelligence painting tools have been widely used in advertising materials, e-commerce images, product packaging, and short video covers. The subsequent question is: Do the copyrights of AI-generated images belong to the users, the platforms, or no one at all? If companies use AI-generated images for commercial purposes, could others claim rights over them? In practice, there have also been cases where companies commission others to create AI-generated images, but disputes arise over the ownership of the results. Unclear ownership can easily lead to disputes.

II. Key points of dispute

First, whether AI-generated images constitute works within the meaning of copyright law; Second, who can become authors and copyright holders—users, platforms, or software developers; Third, what level of intellectual input, such as prompt words and parameter adjustments, is required; Fourth, the binding force of platform user agreements on the ownership of output results; Fifth, the potential infringement risks involving training data and output results.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

Firstly, let's return to the basic elements of the work. The intellectual achievements protected by copyright law must be original and capable of being expressed in a certain form. To determine whether AI-generated images can be protected, the key lies in whether the generation process reflects the intellectual input and personalized choices of natural persons. If the entire process is just pressing a button and entering one or two common words, and the artificial intelligence automatically completes all the expressions, it usually lacks human creative contributions and is difficult to be recognized as a work.

The second layer is that the degree of intellectual input determines the likelihood of protection. The more effort users put into prompt word design, style setting, parameter adjustment, repeated generation, and manual screening and modification, the more likely it is that the generated results will reflect their personalized choices. Therefore, a complete record of the creative process, such as the prompt word text, parameter settings, and generation and modification records, is very important for proving the degree of input. Before commercial use, companies should archive and preserve these process materials.

The third layer is that the platform agreements and contractual provisions shall prevail. Most AI painting platforms' user agreements will stipulate the ownership of the output results, which may be stipulated as belonging to the platform, granting the user a usage license, or stipulating that the user shall enjoy the ownership and bear the responsibility externally. Users must review the platform terms before commercial use; if commissioning others to create or cooperating in development, the ownership of the results, the scope of use, and the liability for infringement should be clearly stipulated in a written contract to avoid disputes over the ownership and usage rights in the future.

On the fourth level, pay attention to infringement risks and compliant use. If the generated images are substantially similar to others' works in terms of expression, they may still constitute infringement; the legality of training data may also lead to disputes. Henglue Law Firm advises that before using AI images for trademarks, packaging, or advertising, enterprises should conduct a similarity check and retain the generation and modification process, so as to prove their own input in the event of ownership disputes; at the same time, it is more effective to clarify ownership and responsibilities through contracts than to assert rights after the fact.

IV. Practical Suggestions and Legal Basis

First, save the prompt words, parameters, and generate modification records to prove the intellectual input. Second, review the platform's user agreement to clarify the ownership and usage restrictions of the output results. Third, sign a written contract for commissioned or collaborative creation, stipulating ownership, usage scope, and responsibility allocation. Fourth, conduct a similarity check before commercial use to reduce the risk of infringement. Fifth, register the core results for copyright protection to establish preliminary proof of rights existence. Main legal basis: Articles 2, 3, 11, and 17 of the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China; specific application shall be subject to the currently effective provisions.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

There are three key points regarding the ownership of AI-generated images: Whether they are protected depends on the intellectual input of the creator; automatically generated images based on simple prompts are generally difficult to identify as works; platform agreements and contractual provisions take precedence, so it's essential to carefully review the terms before commercial use; and it's more effective to document the entire process and incorporate ownership and liability clauses into contracts than to engage in disputes after the fact. For issues involving intellectual property protection and corporate legal matters, professional legal advice should be sought.Intellectual property protection and corporate lawWe can provide a comprehensive solution for services, which includes negotiating contracts and authorizations.Business and contract disputes in enterprisesFor reference, you can refer to the responses to infringement allegations in the plate sectionCriminal defense and criminal case filingFor the column, if you need a comprehensive solution, please feel free to consult usSpecial servicesTeam.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Can AI-generated images obtain copyright protection?

There is a possibility, depending on the intellectual input of the person. If the user demonstrates original and personalized choices through prompt word design, parameter adjustment, multiple rounds of generation, and filtering and modification, the generated results may be recognized as works; if it is just automatically generated by inputting simple prompts, it is usually difficult to obtain copyright protection.

Q2: What evidence is needed to file a lawsuit to assert ownership rights?

The materials needed to prove one's intellectual input include the prompt text, parameter settings, a history of generation and modification, a description of the creation time and process, as well as the platform's agreement on ownership and the commissioned creation or cooperation agreements signed with others. If the work has been registered, the registration certificate can serve as preliminary evidence of the existence of rights.

Q3: How much do lawyers charge for handling such intellectual property cases?

Generally, it is determined based on the amount of the subject matter, the complexity of the case, and whether appraisal or registration is required. Simple cases involving ownership confirmation are relatively straightforward. However, if they involve infringement compensation or disputes involving multiple parties, the workload and costs will increase accordingly. It is recommended to conduct an evidence assessment first and then determine the appropriate approach.

Q4: How long does it take to resolve disputes over the ownership of AI-generated images?

It's usually faster to resolve disputes through negotiation. If the case goes to litigation, the first-instance trial period is generally several months, and it will take even longer if there are appeals or multiple appraisals. It is recommended to clarify the platform agreements and contract terms before commercialization to reduce the need for and uncertainty of post-event rights confirmation.

Q5: What should enterprises pay attention to when using AI images for commercial purposes?

First, review the platform terms to confirm the scope of commercial use, keep records of the generation and modification process, conduct plagiarism checks to avoid infringing on others' works, and clarify ownership and responsibilities in contracts when authorizing or commissioning others to create works. For use in trademarks or packaging, it is also necessary to evaluate the feasibility of registration and use.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. There may be differences in the adjudication standards in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Intellectual property protection legal services·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and public adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In case of disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.