Key holding or allegation
Protection failed on the evidence because the claimant did not sufficiently establish the generation process and individual human creative contribution.
Why it matters
Important counterpoint to Li: Chinese protection is not automatic and evidentiary proof of human contribution matters.
Facts
Claimant asserted copyright in an AI-generated image but could not adequately prove the asserted generation history and individual creative contribution.
Issues before the court
Whether claimant proved sufficient human creative contribution and provenance to establish copyright.
What the court did not decide
The judgment does not categorically hold that AI-generated images are uncopyrightable.
Procedural timeline
Zhangjiagang People's Court
First-instance merits judgment: Copyright claim failed because generation history and individual human creative contribution were not sufficiently proved.
Suzhou appellate court
Appeal withdrawal: Appeal was withdrawn, leaving the first-instance result effective.