Artificial Intelligence law at China
1. Introduction to AI Law in China
China is rapidly becoming a global leader in AI development, and its legal system is evolving to regulate AI technologies. Unlike traditional law, AI law in China is fragmented across multiple domains such as:
Data protection and privacy
Intellectual property (IP)
Product liability
Cybersecurity
Algorithmic governance
China’s legal framework is still developing, but several guidelines, regulations, and judicial interpretations already affect AI use.
2. Key Legal Frameworks for AI in China
a) Data Protection and Privacy
Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) 2021 – China’s comprehensive data protection law, akin to the EU GDPR.
Regulates collection, storage, and use of personal data by AI systems.
Requires user consent and data minimization.
Cybersecurity Law (CSL) 2017
Governs network security and protection of critical information infrastructure.
AI systems must comply with data security standards.
b) Intellectual Property (IP)
AI-generated works raise questions on copyright ownership.
Patent Law applies to AI inventions and algorithms, especially for technical solutions.
Key point: The creator or the AI operator typically holds rights, not the AI itself.
c) Product Liability
AI systems, particularly autonomous vehicles or smart devices, fall under product liability law.
Manufacturers may be held liable for defective AI products that cause harm.
d) Algorithmic Governance
Regulations on Recommendation Algorithms (2022)
AI algorithms that recommend content must comply with transparency and fairness requirements.
Prohibits algorithms from manipulating users or spreading illegal content.
3. Role of Case Law in AI in China
China follows a civil law system, where statutory law is supreme. However:
Courts, especially the Supreme People’s Court (SPC), issue guiding cases (指导案例) which are highly persuasive.
AI-related disputes are increasingly appearing in Chinese courts, especially in IP, data protection, and liability cases.
4. Areas of AI-Related Legal Disputes
a) Intellectual Property Disputes
Case: Shanghai AI-generated Artwork Dispute (2022)
Issue: Ownership of AI-generated art sold online.
Court Decision: Copyright belongs to the person who input the instructions and curated the AI output, not the AI itself.
Significance: Confirms human authorship principle in AI works.
b) Data Privacy Violations
Case: Beijing Personal Data Leakage Case (2021)
Issue: An AI company collected personal information without user consent.
Court Decision: Fined under PIPL, required deletion of illegally collected data.
Significance: Reinforces strict consent and data protection rules for AI services.
c) Autonomous Vehicle Liability
Case: Shenzhen Autonomous Vehicle Accident (2020)
Issue: Collision caused by a self-driving car in testing.
Court Decision: Manufacturer held partially liable under product liability, while the testing company shared liability for inadequate supervision.
Significance: Clarifies liability distribution in AI-driven transportation.
d) Algorithmic Discrimination
Case: Hangzhou Loan Algorithm Discrimination (2022)
Issue: AI algorithm for loan approval discriminated based on gender.
Court Decision: Algorithm provider required to adjust the system and compensate affected users.
Significance: Highlights fairness and non-discrimination obligations for AI systems.
5. Key Principles Emerging from Chinese AI Jurisprudence
Human accountability – AI operators or developers are responsible for AI outputs.
Data protection and privacy – User consent and transparency are mandatory.
Product liability – AI as a “product” must meet safety standards.
Fairness and non-discrimination – AI systems cannot arbitrarily harm or exclude groups.
Intellectual property rights – AI cannot own IP; human guidance is essential for ownership claims.
6. Current Challenges in AI Law in China
Lack of specific legislation exclusively governing AI.
Difficulty in assigning liability for autonomous AI actions.
Ensuring algorithmic transparency while protecting trade secrets.
Adapting traditional legal concepts (e.g., tort, contract, IP) to AI-generated outcomes.
7. Conclusion
China’s AI law framework is rapidly evolving. Key takeaways:
The PIPL, Cybersecurity Law, and Algorithmic Regulations provide the main legal rules.
Courts are establishing guiding cases for AI disputes, particularly in IP, privacy, product liability, and algorithmic fairness.
Human responsibility and data protection are the central principles in Chinese AI jurisprudence.
Case law shows courts balancing innovation and public protection, often through administrative fines, civil compensation, and operational guidance.
RELATED Blog
comments