Cross-border AI and fintech business — United States · New York · China · Hong Kong · European Union
Two-week review: August 27 – September 9, 2026
I. Review of this period — new laws and new cases
This period was quite active in the field of AI law, while digital asset legislation was relatively quiet.In the United States, the Department of Justice (DOJ) stated the federal government's position for the first time in AI copyright litigation, filing an opinion supporting OpenAI's fair use defense; meanwhile, Andersen v. Stability AI went to trial in San Francisco, becoming the first case in the United States in which a jury considers the "model as copy" theory. The California Legislature, at the close of its 2026 session, passed approximately thirty AI-related bills, which are now awaiting the Governor's signature. In China, the Supreme People's Court issued the first nationwide judicial rules on the adjudication of AI dispute cases, expressly addressing deepfakes and personality rights issues. In the European Union, the first systemic risk assessments for providers of general-purpose AI (GPAI) are due in mid-September. In the Web3 field, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)'s proposed Crypto Asset Regulation and the CLARITY Act remain in progress, but neither resulted in new formal legislation within this period.
Part One covers only new matters in this period. All ongoing and upcoming matters are listed in the summary table.
U.S. Federal — DOJ supports OpenAI's fair use defense (September 1, 2026)
The DOJ filed an opinion in the consolidated AI copyright litigation, arguing that training large language models on copyright-protected text generally constitutes fair use.According to industry media reports, this is the first time the U.S. government has taken a position in an AI copyright case. The government's core argument is that model training is transformative — the model does not reproduce the original works in recognizable form — and that model outputs do not directly substitute in the market for the books and articles used for training, so the market harm factor also favors fair use. The opinion is not binding on any court, but it clearly signals the executive branch's position at a time when several copyright lawsuits are about to enter the summary judgment and trial stages.
Practical analysis
This adds a weight to the scales, not a final ruling.The DOJ's view is persuasive and will be cited in every pending training data case; however, fair use still depends on the facts of each case, and how training corpora are obtained (for example, the use of pirated datasets) is another risk that this opinion cannot cure — note that the issue in Bartz v. Anthropic, settled for $1.5 billion, was the pirated copies themselves, not the training conduct. AI developer clients should be advised that a shift in the federal position does not mean data may be obtained from pirated repositories, and that records of lawful data sources should be improved now. For rights holder clients, the main battleground in the near term will shift to reproduction in outputs and the manner in which training data is obtained.
United States Federal — Andersen v. Stability AI trial begins (September 8, 2026)
According to reports, the trial in Andersen v. Stability AI, a class action brought by visual artists, has begun and will for the first time see a U.S. court rule on the theory that "diffusion models themselves are infringing copies of the images on which they were trained."The court's rulings on infringement, fair use and any issue of output similarity will affect the bargaining leverage in every other pending generative AI case. Until verified against the court's original record, all related statements should be treated as preliminary information.
California — State legislature closes 2026 session with roughly 30 AI bills; governor's signing deadline is September 30
The California Legislature closed its 2026 session by passing roughly thirty AI-related bills, covering chatbot safety, minors' online safety, mental health and medical uses, consumer rights, and frontier model regulation.The most closely watched is the "Adam Act" (SB 1119), which would strengthen pre-release testing and safety protocols for AI chatbots directed at minors. Governor Newsom must sign or veto it by September 30, 2026; none of the bills from this session have yet taken effect. This legislation builds on the state's existing frontier AI regime (SB 53 / TFAIA) and companion chatbot law (SB 243), both of which took effect on January 1, 2026.
China — Supreme People's Court issues first nationwide judicial rules for adjudicating AI disputes (September 7, 2026)
The Supreme People's Court issued the Opinions on the Trial of Cases Involving AI-Related Disputes, comprising five parts and 24 articles, the first nationwide adjudicative rules issued by China's highest judicial organ on artificial intelligence.The Opinions address personality-rights infringement arising from AI training and generation, expressly covering "AI face-swapping," voice cloning and "AI resurrection" of deceased persons (with corresponding rights held by close relatives), and also address liability for AI-generated content, algorithmic "big data" differential pricing (big-data price discrimination against existing customers), autonomous driving, training data, open-source software and the handling of AI-generated evidence. Reports note that the Opinions do not reach a conclusion on the copyrightability of AI-generated outputs.
Practical analysis
For clients operating in or targeting the Chinese market, these are the operative rules that courts will actually apply going forward.Any service that clones a real person's face or voice, or generates an identifiable likeness, requires documented authorization and consent — the Supreme People's Court ties liability directly to name rights, portrait rights and voice rights, and extends protection to deceased persons through their close relatives. This should be applied together with the Cyberspace Administration of China's rules on anthropomorphic AI companion services (effective July 15, 2026): consent, labeling and anti-addiction safeguards are now reinforced by both regulation and judicial adjudication. Please review consent processes, dataset provenance and personalized pricing algorithms before the end of the year.
EU — First GPAI systemic risk assessments must be submitted to the AI Office by September 15
Following the entry into force on August 2, 2026 of the enforcement powers under the EU Artificial Intelligence Act concerning general-purpose AI, providers of general-purpose models whose compute exceeds the systemic risk threshold face a key mid-September deadline and must submit their first formal systemic risk assessments to the European AI Office.The Office is expected to review red-teaming methodologies, energy consumption disclosures and use of the standardized template for summaries of copyrighted training data. Fines for general-purpose AI violations may reach up to 3% of global annual turnover or EUR 15 million, whichever is higher.
II. Summary Table — New and Ongoing Tracking
Highlighted rows marked "New" are items in this issue; "Ongoing" items were previously reported and are retained for tracking.
September 1, 2026 · U.S. Federal
DOJ files statement of interest supporting OpenAI's fair use defense in copyright litigation
Status:New
Practical impact:First federal position; persuasive but non-binding — note data-source risk
September 8, 2026 · U.S. Federal
Andersen v. Stability AI trial begins
Status:New
Practical impact:First U.S. case in which a jury considers the "model as copy" theory; judgment pending
September 7, 2026 · China
Supreme People's Court's Opinions on the Trial of Artificial Intelligence Disputes (24 articles)
Status:New
Practical impact:Deepfakes, voice/portrait rights, and AI-generated evidence brought within judicial rules
Until September 30, 2026 · California
Approximately 30 AI bills passed; awaiting governor's signature (including SB 1119)
Status:New
Practical impact:Monitor signature status; new chatbot/minor protection and frontier obligations may take effect in 2027
September 2, 2026 · United States Federal
CFTC Division of Market Oversight issues no-action letter to Electron Exchange
Status:New
Practical impact:Limited scope of relief; monitor broader digital asset market structure signals
September 15, 2026 · European Union
First batch of GPAI systemic risk assessments must be submitted to the AI Office
Status:New
Practical impact:Providers of systemic-risk models must submit; fines of up to 3% of turnover
2026.9.15 · United States federal
Senate procedural vote (cloture) on the CLARITY Act scheduled
Status:Ongoing
Practical impact:Market structure bill; given the tight legislative calendar, prospects for passage are uncertain
2026.8.18 · United States federal
SEC Proposes Crypto Asset Regulation
Status:Ongoing
Practical implications:60-day comment period opens; a tailored crypto issuance/safe harbor regime
2026.8.2 · European Union
Enforcement powers under the Artificial Intelligence Act for general-purpose AI take effect
Status:Ongoing
Practical implications:The AI Office may require the submission of documents, assess models, and impose fines
2026.7.15 · China
CAC Rules on Anthropomorphic AI Companion Services Take Effect
Status:Ongoing
Practical impact:algorithm filing, security assessment, identity disclosure, anti-addiction measures, protection of minors
2026.4.10 · Hong Kong
HKMA Grants First Batch of Stablecoin Issuer Licenses (HSBC, Anchorpoint)
Status:Ongoing
Practical impact:Hong Kong dollar stablecoins to be launched in the second half of 2026 under the Stablecoins Ordinance
2026.2 · China
Reaffirmation of the ban on crypto assets, stablecoins and real-world assets (RWA) (including cross-border)
Status:Ongoing
Practical impact:No RMB-pegged stablecoin may be issued offshore without approval
January 1, 2027 · New York
The RAISE Act takes effect
Status:Ongoing
Practical impact:Frontier model safety protocols; material incidents must be reported to the Department of Financial Services within 72 hours
January 1, 2026 · California
SB 53 (TFAIA) and SB 243 Take Effect
Status:Ongoing
Practical impact:Frontier model transparency/incident reporting; companion chatbot obligations
III. Compliance Guidance
For AI Companies
Establish records of training data provenance now.The DOJ's fair use position may help address the "training" step, but it does not help with how the corpus was obtained. Records demonstrating lawful acquisition of datasets should be retained, and pirated materials should be avoided—the largest AI copyright payout to date turned on this distinction, not on the transformative nature of the training conduct.
Revisit authorization and consent for likeness, voice and personification features.Both the PRC Supreme People's Court's Opinions and the Cyberspace Administration's companion service rules center on "consent." Any face-swapping, voice-cloning, digital human or "resurrection" feature offered to the Chinese market requires documented authorization, clear AI-generated labeling, and safeguards for minors and against excessive reliance.
Map risk exposure to California bills in the current session.Track which of the approximately 30 bills the Governor signs by September 30, particularly the chatbot testing requirement aimed at minors (SB 1119) and any frontier-model amendments, and calendar the dates that may take effect in 2027 so that adjustments to product and safety testing can be planned in advance.
Prepare EU GPAI compliance evidence.If your company provides general-purpose models that meet or exceed the systemic-risk threshold, ensure that systemic-risk assessments, red-team testing records, energy-consumption disclosures and training-data copyright summaries are ready for inspection by the AI Office; non-compliance fines can now reach up to 3% of global turnover.
For Web3 / crypto assets businesses
Actively submit comments on the SEC's proposed Crypto Asset Regulations.The comment period is open. Issuers and platforms should assess whether the proposed issuance exemptions and investment-contract safe harbor apply to their tokens; if they do, comments should be prepared before the deadline — the final rules will affect token issuance structures in the United States.
Track the Senate procedural vote on the CLARITY Act (September 15).The allocation of market-structure jurisdiction between the SEC and the CFTC remains unsettled; the CFTC has indicated that it will proceed with digital-asset rules on its own if the bill stalls. A compliance plan that works under either outcome should be developed.
Avoid RMB-pegged stablecoin and real-world assets (RWA) activities involving China.The reaffirmed prohibition extends to cross-border conduct; issuing RMB-pegged stablecoins offshore without approval is prohibited. Screen China-related products and counterparties accordingly.
Position for Hong Kong's licensed stablecoin market.As the HKMA grants the first batch of issuer licences and HKD stablecoins are expected to launch in the second half of 2026, institutions seeking to enter the Hong Kong market should align their reserve, redemption and anti-money-laundering arrangements with the requirements of the Stablecoins Ordinance.
This briefing is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice. If you require assistance with artificial intelligence legal compliance or Web3 and digital asset compliance, please contact our lawyers.
English Edition
AI & Web3 Biweekly Legal Newsletter
Cross-Border AI and Fintech Practice — United States · New York · China · Hong Kong ·
Two Weeks in Review: August 27 – September 9, 2026
This Period — New Laws & Cases
A busy fortnight for AI law and a quieter one for digital-asset legislation.In the United States, the Department of Justice took the federal government's first-ever position in the AI copyright wars, filing a statement backing OpenAI's fair-use defense, while the Andersen v. Stability AI trial opened in San Francisco — the first U.S. jury to weigh the “model-as-copy” theory. California's Legislature closed its 2026 session having passed roughly thirty AI bills now awaiting the Governor's signature. In China, the Supreme People's Court issued its first national judicial rules on AI disputes, squarely addressing deepfakes and personality rights. In the EU, the first systemic-risk evaluations from general-purpose AI providers fall due mid-September. On the Web3 side, the SEC's Regulation Crypto Assets proposal and the CLARITY Act both remain in play but produced no new law inside the window.
Section 1 covers only what is new in this period. All ongoing and upcoming items are in the Summary Table.
U.S. Federal — DOJ backs OpenAI's fair-use defense in AI copyright litigation (Sept. 1, 2026)
The Department of Justice filed a statement in the consolidated AI copyright litigation asserting that training large language models on copyrighted text is generally fair use.Per trade-press reporting, this is the first time the U.S. government has taken a position in the AI copyright cases. The government's core argument is that training is transformative — the model does not reproduce source works in recognizable form — and that model outputs do not directly substitute in the market for the books and articles used in training, so the market-harm factor also favors fair use. The filing does not bind any court, but it is a significant signal of the Executive Branch's stance as multiple copyright suits head toward dispositive motions and trial.
PRACTITIONER'S COMMENTARY
This is a thumb on the scale, not a holding.The DOJ's view carries persuasive weight and will be cited in every pending training-data case, but fair use remains fact-specific and the acquisition of the training corpus (e.g., pirated datasets) is a separate exposure the brief does not cure — recall the $1.5B Bartz v. Anthropic settlement turned on pirated copies, not the training itself. Advise AI-developer clients that a favorable federal posture does not license sourcing from shadow libraries; document lawful data provenance now. For rights-holder clients, the near-term battleground shifts to reproduction in outputs and to how training data was obtained.
U.S. Federal — Andersen v. Stability AI goes to trial (Sept. 8, 2026)
Trial reportedly opened in Andersen v.Stability AI, the visual-artists' class action, teeing up what would be the first U.S. verdict testing the theory that a diffusion model is itself an infringing copy of its training images. A verdict here — on infringement, fair use, and any output-similarity findings — will shape the leverage in every other pending generative-AI case. Treat all characterizations as preliminary until the docket and any verdict are confirmed against primary court records.
California — Legislature ends 2026 session with ~30 AI bills; Governor's deadline Sept. 30
California's Legislature adjourned its 2026 session having passed roughly thirty AI-related measures spanning chatbot safety, children's online safety, mental-health and medical uses, consumer rights, and frontier-model oversight.Among the most watched is Adam's Law (SB 1119), which would strengthen pre-release testing and safety protocols for AI chatbots that interact with teenagers. Governor Newsom has until September 30, 2026 to sign or veto; none of the new session bills is law yet. This builds on the state's existing frontier-AI regime (SB 53 / TFAIA) and companion-chatbot law (SB 243), both effective January 1, 2026.
China — Supreme People's Court issues first national judicial rules on AI disputes (Sept. 7, 2026)
The Supreme People's Court released its Opinions on the Trial of Cases Involving Artificial Intelligence Disputes — 24 articles across five parts, the first national adjudication rules on AI from China's highest court.The Opinions address personality-rights infringement from AI training and generation, expressly covering AI face-swapping, voice cloning, and “AI resurrection” of the deceased (with standing for close relatives), alongside AI-generated content liability, algorithmic “big-data” discriminatory pricing, autonomous driving, training data, open-source software, and the treatment of AI-generated evidence. Reporting notes the Opinions stop short of resolving the copyrightability of AI-generated works.
PRACTITIONER'S COMMENTARY
For clients operating in or targeting China, this is the practical rulebook courts will now apply.Any service that clones a real person's face or voice, or generates an identifiable likeness, needs documented consent — the SPC ties liability directly to name, portrait, and voice rights, and extends protection to the deceased through their relatives. Pair this with the CAC's anthropomorphic-AI companion rules (effective July 15, 2026): consent, labeling, and anti-addiction safeguards are now reinforced by both regulator and judiciary. Revisit consent flows, dataset provenance, and personalized-pricing algorithms before year-end.
EU — First GPAI systemic-risk evaluations due to the AI Office (Sept. 15, 2026)
Following the AI Act's GPAI enforcement powers taking effect on August 2, 2026, providers of general-purpose models above the systemic-risk compute threshold face a mid-September milestone to submit their first formal systemic-risk evaluations to the European AI Office, which is expected to review red-teaming methodology, energy-consumption disclosures, and use of the standardized copyright training-data summary template.Fines for GPAI non-compliance can reach 3% of global annual turnover or €15 million, whichever is higher.
Summary Table — New and Ongoing
Shaded rows marked “NEW” are from this period. “Ongoing” items were reported earlier and are kept for tracking.
Sept. 1, 2026 · US Fed.
DOJ statement backing OpenAI fair-use defense in AI copyright suits
Status：NEW
What it means：First federal position; persuasive, not binding — check provenance risk
Sept. 8, 2026 · US Fed.
Andersen v. Stability AI trial opens
Status：NEW
What it means：First U.S. jury test of “model-as-copy” theory; verdict pending
Sept. 7, 2026 · China
SPC Opinions on AI disputes (24 articles)
Status：NEW
What it means：Deepfakes, voice/likeness, AI-generated evidence now governed by court rules
By Sept. 30, 2026 · California
~30 AI bills passed; await Governor's signature (incl. SB 1119)
Status：NEW
What it means：Watch signings; new chatbot/child-safety and frontier duties may take effect 2027
Sept. 2, 2026 · US Fed.
CFTC DMO no-action letter to Electron Exchange
Status：NEW
What it means：Narrow relief; monitor for broader digital-asset market-structure signals
Sept. 15, 2026 · EU
First GPAI systemic-risk evaluations due to AI Office
Status：NEW
What it means：Systemic-risk model providers must file; fines up to 3% turnover
Sept. 15, 2026 · US Fed.
CLARITY Act Senate cloture vote scheduled
Status：Ongoing
What it means：Market-structure bill; passage odds uncertain given tight calendar
Aug. 18, 2026 · US Fed.
SEC proposes Regulation Crypto Assets
Status：Ongoing
What it means：60-day comment window open; tailored crypto offering/safe-harbor regime
Aug. 2, 2026 · EU
AI Act GPAI enforcement powers in force
Status：Ongoing
What it means：AI Office may demand docs, evaluate models, impose fines
July 15, 2026 · China
CAC anthropomorphic-AI companion rules effective
Status：Ongoing
What it means：Filing, security assessment, disclosure, anti-addiction, minors protection
Apr. 10, 2026 · Hong Kong
HKMA grants first stablecoin issuer licences (HSBC, Anchorpoint)
Status：Ongoing
What it means：HKD stablecoins launching 2H 2026 under Stablecoins Ordinance
Feb. 2026 · China
Crypto/stablecoin/RWA ban reaffirmed (incl. cross-border)
Status：Ongoing
What it means：No RMB-linked stablecoin issuance abroad without approval
Jan. 1, 2027 · New York
RAISE Act takes effect
Status：Ongoing
What it means：Frontier-model safety protocols; 72-hour incident reporting to DFS
Jan. 1, 2026 · California
SB 53 (TFAIA) & SB 243 in effect
Status：Ongoing
What it means：Frontier transparency/incident reporting; companion-chatbot duties
Call for Compliance
For AI Companies
Document training-data provenance now.The DOJ's fair-use posture helps on the training question but does nothing for how the corpus was acquired. Maintain records showing datasets were lawfully sourced and avoid pirated collections — that distinction, not transformation, drove the largest AI copyright payout to date.
Re-paper consent for likeness, voice, and persona features.China's SPC Opinions and the CAC companion rules both hinge on consent. Any face-swap, voice-clone, digital-human, or “resurrection” feature offered into China needs documented authorization, clear AI-generated labeling, and safeguards for minors and against over-reliance.
Map exposure to California's incoming session bills.Track which of the ~30 measures the Governor signs by September 30, especially teen-chatbot testing (SB 1119) and any frontier-model amendments, and diarize likely 2027 effective dates so product and safety-testing changes are scoped in advance.
Stand up EU GPAI compliance evidence.If you provide a general-purpose model at or above the systemic-risk threshold, ensure your systemic-risk evaluation, red-teaming records, energy disclosures, and copyright training-data summary are ready for the AI Office; non-compliance now carries fines up to 3% of global turnover.
For Web3 / Crypto Companies
Engage on the SEC's Regulation Crypto Assets proposal.The comment window is open. Issuers and platforms should assess whether the proposed offering exemptions and investment-contract safe harbor fit their token and, if so, prepare comments before the deadline — the final rule will shape U.S. token-distribution structures.
Track the CLARITY Act cloture vote (Sept.15). Market-structure allocation between the SEC and CFTC remains unsettled; the CFTC has signaled it will move on its own digital-asset rules if the bill stalls. Build compliance plans that work under either outcome.
Steer clear of RMB-linked stablecoin and RWA activity touching China.The reaffirmed ban reaches cross-border conduct; offshore issuance of yuan-linked stablecoins without approval is prohibited. Screen products and counterparties with China nexus accordingly.
Position for Hong Kong's licensed stablecoin market.With the first HKMA issuer licences granted and HKD stablecoins launching in 2H 2026, firms seeking Hong Kong distribution should align reserve, redemption, and AML arrangements with the Stablecoins Ordinance.
This briefing is prepared for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you are seeking AI legal governance or Web3 & digital-assets compliance, please reach out to our lawyers.
