Everyone's talking about DeepSeek building a ChatGPT competitor for $6M.
Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't – we'll see.
But while we're arguing about AI chips and compute power, we're missing the real story:
China is the only country on Earth that's actually protecting AI creativity.
Not Silicon Valley with its billion-dollar legal battles. Not Europe with its complex regulations. Not Japan with its tech prowess. China.

Here's what they've built since 2018: The Beijing Internet Court.
Think small claims court meets digital age. Anyone – individual creator or small company – can submit an AI copyright case online.
No million-dollar legal teams required. No years-long waiting game. Just practical decisions about real creative work.
Want to protect your AI art?
In the U.S., you're looking at a 3-5 year legal battle that costs more than most creators will ever make.
In China? Submit your case online, show your creative process, and get a decision that looks at what you actually did – not what some 100-year-old law says about human authorship.
China isn't just protecting human creators using AI. They're also granting copyrights to AI apps themselves.
Why? Because people created those apps.
"They found that the AI was created by people.
Therefore they are the authors and the owners.
The Chinese legal courts are that far ahead of us in AI, almost five years ahead of us." "
And they're doing it through a system built for the digital age – specialized courts handling online cases, practical decisions based on real creative work, and protection for both individual creators and AI developers.
While Western courts debate whether AI can create at all, China has:
- Built an e-litigation platform anyone can use
- Created specialized courts for digital creativity
- Protected both human creators using AI and AI apps created by humans
- Made practical decisions case by case
- Done it all without massive legal fees
The country we often think limits individual rights is actually protecting individual creators – both those using AI and those building it.
While we're stuck in theoretical debates about human vs. machine creativity, China's building a system that works in the real world.
One company spends $6M, another spends $6B, for essentially the same product.
Just like DeepSeek, copyright has a far cheaper solution, and it's already working in... China (not again!).
Three AI Copyright Stories That Show Us Why
1. Jason Allen's Digital Opera (2022)
Let's talk about what happens when an artist who understands both code and creativity tries to get copyright protection in today's system.
Jason Allen didn't just click a button and get lucky.
He created "Théâtre D'opéra Spatial" through a process that would exhaust most traditional artists:
624 precise prompts in Midjourney
Professional post-processing in Photoshop, applying years of digital art expertise
Advanced refinements using Gigapixel AI, a tool typically reserved for professional photography work
Multiple rounds of iteration, adjustment, and fine-tuning
"The man did so many prompts and so much work on this image.
He brought together skills that didn't even exist when copyright law was written:
Can you imagine them even trying to conceive of a creative person like Jason now, who can code, who can do graphic design and UI and deliver it all in a gaming interface?"
The result? First place at the Colorado State Fair's art competition. The judges didn't know it was AI-assisted. They just knew it was good.
Then came the U.S. Copyright Office.
Despite showing:
Hundreds of documented creative decisions
Professional-level post-processing work
Technical expertise across multiple tools
A clear creative vision from start to finish
"They denied him a copyright simply because there's a line down the middle here.
You are a human or you're not. Nothing non-human gets it."
Allen did exactly what artists have always done – used the best tools available to bring his vision to life.
“If he had done this in China, I'm sure he would have gotten the copyright."
The Copyright Office couldn't even explain exactly what part was "non-human" because the court has no way of knowing what AI is considered, what an output is.
They just knew AI was involved somewhere, and that was enough to say no.
2. Tencent's Breakthrough (2019)
Back in 2019, Tencent faced a human challenge.
Their AI system, Dreamwriter, was creating automated stock market reviews. Standard stuff, right? Not quite.
The Chinese court looked deeper:
- They examined how Tencent's team selected and developed databases
- They analyzed the algorithm development process
- They studied how the team arranged and selected content
The court's conclusion?
"The AI was created by people. Therefore they are the authors and the owners."
This wasn't just about who pushed the buttons - it was about recognizing the human creativity behind the AI itself.
"This stuff can't just happen.
Even though we pretend copyright law, it's only human beings... It has to bring in people."
Spring Breeze Brings Tenderness by Li - SOURCE: Lexology
3. Li v. Liu: The Image That Changed Everything (2023)
November 2023: Li creates an image called "Spring Breeze Brings Tenderness" using Stable Diffusion. But this wasn't just random prompting.
The court examined every detail:
- Platform choice: "The court said that was absolutely an artistic choice"
- 30 specific prompts defining what to create
- 120 negative prompts specifying what to avoid
- Parameter tweaking showing deep technical understanding
- Post-processing refinements
The judges, who admittedly weren't AI experts, recognized something crucial: these were human creative choices.
"These choices he made met the level of 'intellectual creations' unquote, by the Beijing Internet Court."
Recognizing the Change instead of Trying to Move Backward
China's approach isn't perfect, but it's working. While Western courts say "no" and demand deep pockets for lengthy battles, China's Internet Court system (created in 2018) handles these cases quickly, practically, and case-by-case.
"There's a new intelligence.
Maybe it's super, maybe it's artificial, maybe it's collective intelligence, but it's here.
And to deny copyright is to deny its existence."
We need to recognize collective intelligence because it is all human intelligence - to say it's non-human in AI misses the point.
The original creations were all from us. Even if AI makes up stuff, shouldn't we be able to copyright originality?
Why do we want to keep fighting it?
Oh yeah, because all the copyrights are owned by the money and the lawyers that are going to settle this in 5 or 10 years, while the rest of us just sit on the sidelines.
Here's the wake-up call: China's ahead in understanding AI Copyright, but they're also smart.
By allowing these small cases to come in and not deciding them only on the big players, they're building a system that works.
"Hey, everybody, let's copy China in this way.
They are leading, and you don't really need to look too deeply into it.
They're trying to do something different."
RESOURCES
China’s First Case on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Picture
Beijing Internet Court ruling in first case of copyright infringement of AI-generated article
Is the Chinese 'Dreamwriter' Case Really a Groundbreaking Case for AI-Generated Works?
A shocking Chinese AI advancement called DeepSeek is sending US stocks plunging
‘Someone had to be first': Pueblo artist criticized after AI painting wins at Colorado State Fair
Share this post