China's Supreme People’s Court has outlined a comprehensive strategy to address intellectual property issues associated with artificial intelligence. The recently released Implementation Plan for Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property Rights (2026-2030) establishes a framework that seeks to clarify the legal status of outputs generated by AI. This approach includes defining data ownership and determining accountability among various stakeholders involved in AI, such as developers, operators, and users.
Understanding the plan requires a focus on three central areas. First, the identification of the legal standing of AI-generated content is essential. Second, the plan offers clearer guidelines on data ownership. Lastly, it specifies the responsibilities of AI developers, the companies deploying these tools, and the end users.
SPC Vice-President Tao Kaiyuan emphasized the urgency of developing legal opinions to handle disputes efficiently, ensuring safety and promoting fairness and innovation.
This new framework builds on previous regulatory measures that gained momentum from late 2023. For instance, beginning in November 2023, Chinese courts recognized copyright protections concerning AI-generated images, but only in situations where a clear human contribution exists in the creative process. The rationale is straightforward: if an individual significantly influences an AI's output, they are entitled to authorship rights.
Further, in November 2025, the SPC enacted additional rules enhancing protections for data intellectual property. A significant shift occurred in October 2025, when internet courts were removed from handling certain AI copyright cases, which now fall under traditional judicial systems.
However, this plan reveals notable gaps, particularly in its approach to the evolving cryptocurrency landscape. The plan operates entirely within a conventional intellectual property framework, which centralizes ownership. Rights are assigned to identifiable human actors, flowing through established legal frameworks. There is no consideration for decentralized models like tokenized data ownership or blockchain-based AI training marketplaces, which are emerging in the Web3 space. China’s ongoing hostile stance toward cryptocurrencies, dating back to its 2021 ban on crypto trading and mining, highlights this limitation. As a result, the AI legal framework may foster an environment conducive to centralized AI development while rendering decentralized alternatives legally ambiguous, posing challenges for innovators in the space.