"AI Hacking": Legal Risks Behind the Business

“Just wondering, are these considered infringements? I believe the publisher has already profited, so is the platform just turning a blind eye…” Not long ago, a celebrity manager posted a blog on social media, sparking widespread attention to “AI magic modification” videos. The post also included several screenshots of movie scenes featuring the celebrity after being “AI magic modified.”

The so-called “AI magic modification” videos, simply put, refer to using AI (artificial intelligence) to alter, edit, or enhance original video content to achieve a specific effect or purpose. These videos not only change the authenticity and integrity of the original content but also pose multiple risks of infringing on the copyright or portrait rights of the involved parties.

Who is creating these “AI magic modification” videos? What kind of “industry chain” is behind them?

“You don’t need a computer, just a phone and four or five AI apps.” AI video creator Xu Haoming has over 800,000 followers on a short video platform. His account posts only “AI magic modification” content, involving TV dramas like “Empresses in the Palace” and “Savagery.”

Xu Haoming told the “Workers’ Daily” reporter that producing a one-minute “AI magic modification” video takes about 1 to 3 hours. The main steps include organizing character images, using AI to generate dialogue, creating video scenes, and cloning voices.

Where do the original materials for these videos come from? The reporter learned that generating storyline-altering “AI magic modification” videos only requires uploading images of the main actors, then performing text-to-image conversion, video generation from images, lip-syncing, and other operations. Some AI software require a membership fee after exceeding a certain number of uses or video duration to continue generating content.

Additionally, according to “practitioners” like Liu Yu, the reporter found on some e-commerce platforms that many vendors sell movie and TV show resources via cloud drives, with prices ranging from 0.99 yuan to several hundred yuan.

Liu Yu started experimenting with AI video creation in early 2023. He has been running a full-time AI video account for over three years, with followers exceeding 100,000 on multiple social platforms.

“Initially, there was no income, but later, monthly earnings ranged from a few thousand to tens of thousands of yuan. Sometimes, a month could bring over 100,000 yuan.” Liu Yu said he mainly produces and shares AI video tutorials, monetizing by promoting AI video software within the tutorials.

Liu Yu also mentioned that some platforms have task reward systems. Once an account has 2,000 to 3,000 followers, it can join certain groups to receive creative tasks.

Besides managing accounts, Liu Yu and his team also offer AI video production training. “We have a training camp that uses private live streams for teaching, and we can also help recommend tracks and package accounts,” he said.

“The training camp costs 1,980 yuan per year.” Liu Yu explained that the courses cover similar content, “starting from the basics, explaining the underlying logic of AI-generated images and videos. Once you grasp these principles, you can create any type of ‘magic modification’ video.”

Currently, some “AI magic modification” video accounts have been gradually shut down. The potential infringement behaviors of the creators and the harms of “AI magic modification” content are increasingly being scrutinized.

Zhao Hu, a partner at Beijing Zhongwen Law Firm who has long focused on intellectual property cases, believes that “AI magic modification” videos that involve re-editing, splicing, or generating content from TV dramas may involve multiple types of infringement. “On one hand, they may infringe on the copyright of the TV drama producers, which is still under valid protection. On the other hand, they may violate the portrait rights of the actors,” Zhao Hu said. “Especially if the videos distort the images of heroes and martyrs, they could also infringe on public interests and violate the Heroic Martyrs Protection Law, potentially leading to administrative penalties.”

In response, Wang Zhenjun, director of the Cultural Industry Research Center at Zhengzhou University, told the reporter that “AI magic modification” videos might violate the original intent of the works, especially when used in parody or entertainment, leading to deconstruction of the original and turning sacred classics into vulgar content.

“At the same time, these videos could cause misunderstandings about historical facts, figures, and heroic images, posing potential harm to the growth of young people,” Wang Zhenjun said.

Zhao Hu believes that platforms, as major beneficiaries, should assume primary responsibility for supervising and managing “AI magic modification” videos. “Platforms need to establish comprehensive intellectual property protection systems and strengthen communication with rights holders,” he said. For clearly infringing, public-interest-violating, or distortive “AI magic modification” videos, platforms should not wait for complaints to remove them but should proactively take action and promptly take down illegal content.

“Creators, related training institutions, and vendors selling materials also face legal risks.” Zhao Hu pointed out that selling TV and movie video materials without authorization is itself an infringement of others’ copyright.

Recently, the Cyberspace Administration of China launched a special campaign to crack down on issues like the spread of “digital garbage” through AI-generated content. As of now, over 39,000 accounts have been lawfully dealt with. (The names Xu Haoming and Liu Yu are pseudonyms in this article.)