Key holding or allegation
The court did not attribute authorship to the software-generated text as such under the natural-person authorship framework, while recognising protectable human-created aspects of the overall report.
Why it matters
Early direct Chinese AIGC copyrightability authority predating the current generative-AI era.
Facts
Dispute included portions of an analytical report automatically generated by software.
Issues before the court
Whether automatically generated text could itself qualify as a copyright work and who could claim rights.
What the court did not decide
Does not decide copyrightability of modern generative-AI outputs produced through extensive iterative human creative control.
Procedural timeline
Beijing Internet Court
Merits judgment: Automatically generated text was not attributed natural-person authorship as such; human-created aspects of the report could be protected.