01
Factual background & dispute
- The designer published butterfly chair images and prompts.
- After unsuccessful cooperation talks, the defendants used public prompts to generate other designs and manufacture chairs.
- The claimant supplied a later demonstration rather than original records for the three disputed images.
02
Core issues & judicial focus
- Evidence of original contributions to particular images
- Ideas versus expression
- Substantial similarity between images and physical products
03
Judicial finding & holding
- Copyrightable originality was not established on this record.
- The court also found meaningful differences in expression and no established protectable competitive advantage.
- All claims were dismissed; the official report records withdrawal of the appeal.
Dates & procedural record
- Court-account representative-case publication; no precise decision date inferred.
04
Practical risk implications
01Retain image-specific prompts, versions, parameters, process files and human edits.
02Distinguish concepts, final expression and manufacturing designs in contracts, with evidence-delivery requirements.
03Assess copyrightability, expression-level similarity and competitive interests before asserting claims.