China IP Update: AI Disputes & Competition Cases

In this insight for Kilpatrick, author Charles W. Gray shares key developments in China’s intellectual property and competition law landscape, including its leading position in the World Intellectual Property Organization’s 2026 innovation cluster rankings. China accounts for 25 of the world’s top 100 innovation clusters, excluding Taiwan, with Shenzhen-Hong Kong-Guangzhou ranking first globally. The update also examines new judicial guidance on artificial intelligence, antitrust enforcement, unfair competition, and technical evidence in IP cases.

The Supreme People’s Court (SPC) has published six typical antitrust cases addressing restricted dealing, discriminatory treatment, unfairly high prices, horizontal monopoly agreements, and judicial review of administrative enforcement. Although none involves IP licensing, the same legal principles may apply to dominant licensors operating in China. Companies with significant market positions should therefore assess their distribution practices, pricing policies, and contractual arrangements for potential competition law risks.

New SPC guidance on disputes involving artificial intelligence addresses issues including deepfakes, voice cloning, AI-generated hallucinations, online doxxing, big-data price discrimination, autonomous driving, and model training. These developments are particularly relevant to foreign AI developers training models on Chinese-language content or deploying AI systems in China. The SPC has also issued nine typical unfair-competition cases covering trade secrets, commercial disparagement, false advertising, passing off, and online competition, establishing important guidance for lower courts handling these disputes.

Finally, China’s Supreme People’s Procuratorate has published five typical cases illustrating the use of technical expertise in IP enforcement. These address patent infringement, trade-secret protection, copyright technical protection measures, and unauthorized deep linking. For foreign rights holders, the cases offer insight into how Chinese prosecutors assess technically complex IP disputes, particularly trade-secret theft and whether confidential information qualifies as a trade secret. Together, these developments highlight the importance of monitoring China’s evolving judicial interpretations and enforcement practices across IP, competition, and AI regulation.

CONTINUE READING…