Beijing court: AI face‑swap in short drama violates actor’s portrait rights

Ruling and facts

A Beijing Internet Court (北京互联网法院) has found that a short online drama that used AI face‑swap technology unlawfully infringed a well‑known actor’s portrait rights and ordered the producer and the distributor to publish written apologies and pay damages. The plaintiff discovered their likeness digitally mapped onto characters in a 44‑episode short series totaling about 90 minutes, and it has been reported that social‑media hashtags and widespread comment led many viewers to believe the actor had actually appeared in the show.

It has been reported that the producer, identified in court as A Company (A公司), told judges the contested images were generated by an AI workflow — large language model prompts into a text‑to‑image model, followed by selection and video face‑swap — and that there was no subjective intent to use the actor’s portrait. The distributor, B Company (B公司), said it held a lawful copyright licence to broadcast the series. Who bears responsibility — the creator or the platform with distribution rights? The court held both liable.

Legal reasoning and wider context

Citing the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China (中华人民共和国民法典), the court concluded that portrait rights protect recognizability by the general public or relevant industry groups, not only pixel‑perfect identity. The judges found the two disputed clips’ facial contours and features were highly similar to the plaintiff, and public commentary showed ordinary viewers could identify the actor. A Company failed to reproduce its creation process when ordered and thus bore the evidentiary burden; the court rejected the “AI coincidence” defence. The court also rejected B Company’s argument that a copyright licence absolved it of portrait‑rights duties, saying copyright and personal image rights are distinct and distributors must perform reasonable review before publication.

The decision arrives as China tightens regulation on synthetic media and deepfakes, and follows growing legal scrutiny of AI‑generated likenesses globally. It signals that Chinese courts will enforce personal‑image protections even when deep‑synthesis tools are used, and that licensing a work’s copyright will not automatically shield platforms or licensees from separate privacy and personality claims.