The Supreme People's Court's "Opinions on the Trial of Cases Involving Artificial Intelligence Disputes" (Fa Fa [2026] No. 10) instructs lower courts on how to handle personality-rights claims arising from deepfake face swapping and voice cloning, treating unauthorized digital replicas as capable of infringing an individual's rights regardless of whether the output is used to spread false claims. The guidance also sets evidentiary rules and burden-of-proof standards for disputes involving AI training data, and covers liability arising from autonomous-driving and assisted-driving vehicle accidents, algorithmic price discrimination against consumers, patent eligibility for AI-assisted inventions, and liability allocation for open-source AI software. On the contested questions of whether an AI-generated work can itself be copyrighted, and whether unauthorized use of copyrighted works to train AI models constitutes infringement, the document leaves both unresolved, an omission commentators noted was significant because Beijing's Internet Courts had already issued rulings recognizing copyright in AI outputs before the Supreme People's Court stripped those courts of jurisdiction over online copyright disputes. The rules take effect immediately as binding guidance for courts nationwide. Indian technology companies operating AI products in the Chinese market, and firms handling India-linked user data through China-based AI vendors, will need to track how these evidentiary and liability rules are applied in early cases.