December 12, BeijingInternet CourtfirstA five-member panel was formed to publicly hear the first national "AI sound infringement case”.
The plaintiff YinVoiceoverAs a professional, Yin has recorded many audio works. Yin accidentally discovered that his voice was AI-ized and sold on an APP called "Magic Sound Workshop" under the name of "Magic Xiaoxuan". Therefore, Yin sued the five defendants, including Beijing Xiaowen Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd., the operator of "Magic Sound Workshop", to the Beijing Internet Court on the grounds that the defendants' actions infringed his voice rights.
The plaintiff believes that the dubbing works using the plaintiff's voice are widely circulated on apps such as Douyin and Zhibo. Among them, Douyin user "Xiaohe Kanju" has published a total of 119 works using the plaintiff's voice since September 7, 2021. After sound screening and tracing, it was found that the voices in the above-mentioned sound works came from the "Magic Sound Workshop" APP operated by the defendant Beijing Xiaowen Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd. The defendant Zhongguang Audio and Video (Beijing) Culture Media Co., Ltd. handed over the audio of the three books recorded by the plaintiff for it to the defendant Microsoft (China) Co., Ltd. The defendant Microsoft (China) Co., Ltd. processed the plaintiff's voice into AI and authorized the defendant Shanghai Lanyun Network Technology Co., Ltd. and the defendant Beijing Sino Times Technology Development Co., Ltd. to sell it to the outside. However, the plaintiff has never authorized any third party to AI the voice recorded by it and sell it to the outside. The above-mentioned defendants' actions have seriously infringed the plaintiff's voice rights and should bear the tort liability of stopping infringement, apologizing and compensating the plaintiff for economic losses and mental losses.
All five defendants denied infringement. Beijing Xiaowen Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd. believed that the sound products in its APP had a legitimate source, from Microsoft (China) Co., Ltd. Microsoft (China) Co., Ltd. claimed that the sound it used came from China Broadcasting Audio and Video (Beijing) Culture Media Co., Ltd. China Broadcasting Audio and Video (Beijing) Culture Media Co., Ltd. believed that it had cooperated with the plaintiff and agreed that the copyright of the works recorded by the plaintiff belonged to it. Shanghai Blue Cloud Network Technology Co., Ltd. and Beijing Sino-Times Technology Development Co., Ltd. argued that they were the platform operator of Microsoft China and the distributor of the products involved, respectively, and did not constitute infringement.
In his final statement, the plaintiff believed that the factual basis of the claim in this case was infringement of personality rights, not copyright infringement, and it should not be presumed that the defendant had authorization for the plaintiff's personality rights just because the defendant had the plaintiff's authorization for copyright.
At present, the case is still under further trial.