Author Archives: yytbest

Does Your Open-Source AI License Disclose Enough to Qualify for Exemption in China?

(By You Yunting) On September 7, 2026, the Supreme People’s Court of China (“SPC”) released the Opinions of the Supreme People’s Court on the Trial of Cases Involving Artificial Intelligence Disputes (最高人民法院关于依法审理涉人工智能纠纷案件的意见) (“Opinions”). To support the AI industry development, the Opinions introduce a liability exemption for open-source AI software: where a developer publicly discloses the functions and security risks of open-source AI software and a third party’s use of the code module causes infringement, a court may find the developer exempt from infringement liability. However, having reviewed several of the major open-source AI models currently available in China, I found that their disclosures of functions and security risks are generally rather brief and may well fall short of what the exemption requires. This will discuss what an adequate disclosure of the functions and security risks of open-source AI software should look like.

READ MORE

The U.S. Restores the Right to Repair for Car Owners – Why Not China’s New Energy Vehicles?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) In July 2026, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reached a litigation settlement with agricultural machinery giant John Deere. Under the settlement, John Deere will, over the next decade, provide farm equipment owners and independent repair shops with diagnostic, reprogramming and repair resources equivalent to those offered to its authorized dealers on fair and reasonable terms. The case expands the scope of the Right to Repair from physical spare parts to open software access and has drawn global attention. Today, we will discuss whether this settlement will impact the right to repair for China’s new energy vehicles (NEVs).

READ MORE

Porsche Engine Oil Change Only at Authorized Dealerships: The Hidden Repair Monopoly by Design

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Recently, Porsche has been sued in the United States by car owners for illegally monopolizing the vehicle repair service market. Some car owners believe that even routine maintenance is becoming increasingly difficult to perform outside the official system. In fact, this issue is not unique to Porsche or the automotive industry. In recent years, more and more manufacturers have designed their product systems to be increasingly sophisticated and complex, locking consumers firmly into official repair channels and charging maintenance fees far above market average rates. This trend is known in Europe and the United States as the “Right-to-Repair” controversy. Today, let’s discuss the global legal battle over the right to repair.

READ MORE

Adobe Sued by Own Shareholders Over AI Training on AI-Generated Images

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Recently, Adobe, a software company that has long been vocal in enforcing its copyrights, together with its management, was sued by its own shareholders in the Northern District of California for alleged securities fraud based on false statements, due to using pirated materials to train its AI. The core allegations in the complaint include Adobe’s use of a large number of pirated books and AI-generated images sourced from its competitor Midjourney to train its AI models. I have often discussed the legal issues of training AI on pirated content, but today I would like to talk about what legal risks arise from using AI-generated images to train AI models.

READ MORE

How Would Elon Musk’s Lost U.S. Antitrust Case Be Decided Under Chinese Law?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) In April 2024, Elon Musk’s X platform sued the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) and major advertisers including Unilever and Mars for their concerted boycott against the X platform with the organization of Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), constituting a horizontal monopoly agreement in violation of antitrust law and causing it billions of dollars in losses. In March 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas dismissed the lawsuit at the preliminary hearing. Today we will explore how this case might be handled if it were brought under Chinese law.

READ MORE

Who Should Prove Authenticity in Trademark Disputes Over Goods with Removed Traceability Codes?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Due to their lower prices, de-identified products — those with anti-counterfeit codes removed — are highly popular on e-commerce platforms. These discounted offerings, however, undermine brand owners’ price control mechanisms, leading to frequent trademark infringement lawsuits against sellers. While Chinese courts generally decline to find infringement where the de-identified goods are demonstrably genuine and produced by the brand owner, many small and medium-sized sellers are nonetheless held liable even when dealing in authentic goods. Today, let us analyze how courts might equitably balance brand protection against commercial freedom in such disputes.

READ MORE

Must Disputes Arising from Accidents at IHG Hotels in China Be Arbitrated in the U.S.?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) According to media reports, on April 8, 2026, the consumer associations of Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei jointly summoned the operating entity of InterContinental Hotels Group (IHG) in China, alleging multiple clauses in its membership agreement suspected of infringing upon consumers’ legitimate rights and interests, including excluding the application of Chinese laws and forcing Chinese consumers to arbitrate disputes in the United States, and demanded specific rectifications. This article will discuss a question: if you suffer an accident or personal injury during your stay at an IHG hotel in China, are you legally obligated to go to the U.S. for arbitration?

READ MORE

From “手打” to “一袋半”: How Judicial Tolerance Enables Trademark Wordplay?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Recently, Mr. Luo Yonghao, a well-known Chinese entrepreneur and livestreamer, criticized on Weibo that a “120W charger” label was potentially misleading consumers, sparking widespread public attention. Similarly, controversy has resurfaced around two trademarks owned by Jinmailang, a major Chinese food company: “手打” (Chinese Pinyin: “Shou Da”, literally “Hand-Kneaded”) and “一袋半” (Chinese Pinyin: “Yi Dai Ban”, literally “One and a Half Packets”). Although the “120W” mark was never registered, Jinmailang’s “手打” and “一袋半” trademarks were successfully registered. During the invalidation proceedings, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) found both marks deceptive, but the Beijing Higher People’s Court reversed these rulings on appeal. This article will analyze the two cases and their underlying legal issues.

READ MORE

What’s Left for Photographers When the Court Decided That the AI-generated Image Did Not Constitute Infringement Upon the Photographic Work it Mimicked?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) On April 2nd, 2026, the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court in Germany issued a final judgment regarding a dispute over an AI-generated image that mimicked a photographic work, holding that the defendant’s conduct did not constitute copyright infringement. Under China’s Copyright Law, such conduct would also fall outside the scope of copyright infringement. This judgment means that a significant portion of photographers’ business may be lawfully replaced by AI. The underlying cause is that the traditional idea-expression dichotomy in copyright law can no longer adapt to the creation logic of generative AI.

READ MORE

Where Is the Legal Boundary of AI Skill Distillation?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Imagine this scenario: you have worked at a company for five years, and your daily emails, meeting minutes, and handled contracts are all stored on the company’s servers. One day, you are called in for a talk and HR informs you that your position is redundant. Your replacement is a “Skill file” distilled from your five years of work records—an AI system that can perform your job duties using this file. Today, we will discuss whether such skill distillation raises legal issues.

READ MORE

DJI vs. Insta360: Is Insta360’s Legal Response Justifiable?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Recently, a lawsuit filed by Chinese drone giant DJI against its rival Insta360 has drawn attention from both the tech and legal communities. The core dispute is straightforward: several engineers who had left DJI for Insta360 filed multiple drone-related patent applications within one year of their resignation. While the inventors’ names were kept anonymous in domestic patent filings, subsequent disclosures under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) revealed that all the patents were invented by those former DJI employees. DJI has since sued Insta360, seeking for the corresponding patent rights to be transferred to itself.

READ MORE

The Cursor-Kimi Dispute: Gates and “Gotchas” in the Open-Source LLM Licensing

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Recently, the AI coding assistant Cursor, developed by the American startup Anysphere, released its new AI coding feature, Composer 2. However, users discovered that its underlying model was in fact Kimi K2.5, developed by Moonshot AI, leading to a controversy over Cursor’s failure to credit the model as required by the license. After public confirmation of Moonshot AI’s head of pre-training, even Elon Musk weighed in. While open-source LLMs (Large Language Models) are often free to use, their user agreements are not mere formalities. Today, let’s discuss the special clauses hidden in these user agreements and the consequences of non-compliance therewith.

READ MORE

Apple Intelligence’s Unauthorized Rollout in China: A Technical Accident or a Deliberate Regulatory Game?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) In the early morning of March 31, 2026, Apple rolled out Apple Intelligence to some Chinese users whose iPhones had been updated to iOS 26.4, but the rollout was quickly halted. Today, we will examine the potential legal liabilities involved, the likelihood of regulatory penalties, and whether the rollout was merely a technical accident or a deliberate regulatory game.

I. A Three-Hour Unauthorized Rollout of Apple Intelligence in China

In the early morning of March 31, 2026, some users of China-version iPhones running iOS 26.4 discovered that Apple Intelligence had unexpectedly become available on their devices. The “Siri” entry in the Settings menu was renamed as “Apple Intelligence & Siri”. User feedback indicated that models from Baidu’s ERNIE and Alibaba’s Qwen were integrated into Apple Intelligence in China-version iPhones. For visual analysis functions, some users reported that the image recognition technology associated with Google was invoked.

READ MORE

Does Valve’s Labubu Defense Hold Up?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Previously, I wrote an article titled Should Global Steam in China Be Scrutinized Too Since Valve Loot Boxes Was Sued as Gambling in the U.S.?, commenting on New York State Attorney General’s lawsuit against Valve over its in-game loot box mechanism. Recently, Valve posted a defense on Steam’s official website, arguing that its in-game loot boxes mechanism is like baseball cards, Pokémon, Magic the Gathering, and Labubu. At first glance, this defense seems plausible, but in reality, it contains fundamental flaws and borders on sophistry. Let’s take a closer look.

READ MORE

Why MiHoYo Game Content Leaks May Not Constitute Criminal Copyright Infringement in China？

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Recently, Chinese media reported that the video game developer miHoYo had filed a criminal complaint that someone cracked its game testing client and leaked unreleased character designs online. Following a criminal investigation, the police detained the suspects and determined to prosecute them for the crime of copyright infringement, as the unauthorised disclosure not only infringed miHoYo’s copyrights but also satisfied the statutory threshold for criminal prosecution due to the substantial volume of online views. From the perspective of protecting corporate rights and combating online infringement, the prompt intervention of the police is understandable. However, from the standpoint of the principle of modesty and the principle of legality, it is worth examining whether this case is appropriate for criminal prosecution. In the author’s view, such an act is better addressed through civil remedies rather than criminal proceedings.

READ MORE