On March 28, 2026, Chinese singer Shan Yichun performed Li Ronghao's original song "Li Bai" without authorization at her Shenzhen concert, triggering a copyright dispute. Her team attempted to evade liability by claiming that "copyright review was the organizer's responsibility and she was unaware," which instead drew broader criticism. "Unawareness" has become a frequently abused excuse for copyright exemption, especially in AI-driven content distribution, posing new challenges for copyright compliance for both Chinese and international enterprises.

AI tools have lowered creation barriers but created compliance traps. As dissemination technology upgrades, scenarios for copyright infringement have become increasingly complex. From traditional plagiarism and unauthorized use, to novel dissemination forms catalyzed by the AI, infringement risks are ubiquitous and even hard to avoid. Midjourney and Nano Banana empower universal text-to-image creation, turning the vision of “everyone is an artist” into reality. Suno and Lyria support creative musical adaptation, bringing “everyone can make music” into everyday life. Sora and Seedance drive the popularization of text-to-video production, making “everyone is a director” no longer a distant dream. While AI tools have greatly lowered the barriers to creativity and dissemination, they have also made “unintentional infringement” a frequent compliance risk. Many individuals and enterprises mistakenly believe that “if it’s available online, it’s free to use” or “AI-generated content has no copyright,” without realizing that such actions may cross the red line of copyright protection, constitute potential infringement, and incur corresponding legal liabilities. 

China's Copyright Law has long clearly defined the boundaries of copyright protection and the allocation of infringement liability. Article 26 stipulates that, unless otherwise provided in this Law, anyone that wishes to use another's work shall conclude a licensing contract with the copyright owner of the work. Without such permission, no organization or individual may exploit such work without authorization. Article 38 provides that when a performance organizer organizes a performance of a work, the organizer shall obtain permission from, and pay remuneration to, the work's copyright owner. However, this does not mean that performers and related entities are entirely exempt from copyright review obligations. If they are subjectively negligent regarding the infringing conduct, they remain legally liable for corresponding responsibility and may not shift blame or evade liability.

Furthermore, Article 54 of the Copyright Law explicitly stipulates that when a copyright or copyright-related rights are infringed, the infringer shall make compensation based on the actual losses suffered by the rights holder or the illegal proceeds obtained by the infringer. In the case of any intentional infringement of a copyright or copyright-related rights, if the case is serious, compensation may be paid ranging from one to five times the amount determined according to the aforesaid method, which is indeed a substantial deterrent. In judicial practice, when adjudicating liability allocation, courts examine not only whether the infringing conduct objectively occurred, but also whether the infringing party fulfilled reasonable duty of care. In fact, "unawareness" is not absolutely precluded as a defense against copyright infringement; however, its establishment as a valid defense requires simultaneous satisfaction of three core conditions: "actual and constructive lack of knowledge," "fulfillment of reasonable duty of care," and "ability to prove legitimate source." As a performer, Shan Yichun failed to fulfill basic reasonable duty of care; even if she pled "unawareness," her subjective negligence precludes complete exemption from liability, and she remains obligated to offer a formal apology and pay damages, among other responsibilities.

Such defenses are commonplace in judicial practice. In Beijing's first AI image generation infringement case (Case No. (2025) Jing 0112 Xing Chu 558), the defendant used AI to make minor modifications to another's original artwork for puzzle production and profit, defending on grounds that he "merely made detail modifications and was unaware of the infringement." The court ultimately determined that copyright infringement was established, and the enterprise and related responsible persons were held criminally liable. This serves as a warning that regardless of how dissemination forms innovate, "authorization first, use second" remains an inviolable compliance baseline.

For Chinese and international enterprises seeking to avoid copyright disputes in the dissemination process, three core imperatives must be firmly grasped: 

• First, strengthen compliance awareness. Drop the misconception that “ignorance means exemption.” Make copyright review a pre-condition for all dissemination activities to prevent issues before they arise.
• Second, standardize copyright usage. Whether using music or images at offline events, or creating content with AI tools online, always verify copyright ownership, obtain authorization through legitimate channels, and keep proper records of licensing.
• Third, define a clear responsibility framework. As the organizer of communication activities, the company must fulfill its primary responsibility, provide regular copyright training to staff, and avoid copyright disputes caused by individual negligence.

Copyright protection is a fundamental baseline for corporate compliance. In today’s increasingly diverse communication landscape, only by adhering to copyright principles and proactively fulfilling review obligations can companies effectively avoid infringement risks, safeguard brand reputation, and ensure sustainable growth.