"The wave of artificial intelligence has swept through the field of education, and AI-assisted teaching and intelligent assessment tools have entered campuses. However, Li Feifei, a leading scholar in the field of artificial intelligence, recently warned that the biggest risk of AI entering campus is not that students cheat with it, but that it may weaken learning motivation. This view quickly sparked social debate. As lawyers, we are concerned not only with changes in education methods, but also with the underlying legal risks: How do AI education products comply? How is student data protected? Can impaired motivation to learn be held accountable? This article will take a legal perspective to sort out the legal boundaries and coping strategies for schools, parents and educational technology enterprises to enter the campus of AI."

"Legal Qualification of AI Educational Applications: Tool or Responsible Subject?"

"Li Feifei's warning points directly to the potential erosion of learning motivation by AI, which involves the legal attributes of AI education products. According to Article 1019 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, the processing of personal information shall follow the principles of legality, legitimacy and necessity. At present, AI learning platforms on the market often analyze students' behaviors, emotions, and even cognitive abilities through algorithms to personalize and recommend learning content. However, if the algorithm is not properly designed, excessive pursuit of efficiency and ignoring the psychological needs of students may constitute an indirect violation of the right to education."

"From a legal qualitative point of view, the AI system itself is not the subject of liability, and its developers and users - that is, educational technology companies and schools - are legally eligible defendants. If the AI product causes a significant decrease in students' learning motivation, parents may claim compensation or rectification based on Article 1165 of the Civil Code, claiming that the product has design defects or the service does not conform to the agreement. However, in practice, it is difficult to prove, because "reduced motivation to learn" belongs to subjective feelings and lacks objective quantitative standards. Therefore, lawyers recommend that parents keep evidence such as study records, psychological assessment reports, etc. to support claims in disputes."

"In addition, the education department has already preliminarily regulated the entry of AI into campuses. The Notice on Strengthening Artificial Intelligence Education in Primary and Secondary Schools issued by the Ministry of Education in 2023 emphasizes that AI applications need to adhere to a people-oriented approach to prevent technological alienation. This provides an administrative basis for legal qualification, but it still needs to be judged comprehensively in combination with product functions and use scenarios."

"Student Data Protection: AI Education Product Compliance Red Line"

"AI education products run on massive amounts of student data, including grades, behavioral trajectories, and even biometric information. The disclosure or misuse of such data will trigger strict liability under the Personal Information Protection Law of the People's Republic of China. Article 28 of the Law stipulates that the personal information of minors under the age of 14 is sensitive personal information, and the processing requires the individual consent of the guardian and follows the principle of minimum necessity."

"In reality, many AI learning applications are authorized by a "blanket" checkbox at the time of registration, and do not separately prompt the sensitive information processing terms, which is suspected of violating the informed consent rule. Lawyers often encounter parental consultation in practice: after children use AI homework coaching tools, they often receive marketing calls, which is likely to be due to illegal resale of data. According to Article 66 of the Personal Information Protection Law, the illegal handling of personal information can be punished by a fine of up to 50 million yuan, and even face criminal liability if the circumstances are serious."

"Schools also have a review obligation when introducing AI products. If the school recommends or enforces the use of an AI tool without reviewing its data security qualifications, the school may be jointly and severally liable for failure to fulfill its management responsibilities in the event of a breach. Therefore, lawyers recommend that schools establish an AI product access assessment mechanism, require suppliers to provide data security certification, privacy policy texts, and clarify data ownership and liability for breach of contract."

"Impaired Learning Motivation: Pathways and Obstacles to Legal Advocacy"

"Li Feifei refers to the "weakening of learning motivation", which can be legally classified as defective or infringing damage to the performance of education service contracts. If the school uses AI as the core of teaching, and the students are bored due to the boredom and excessive pressure of the recommended content of the algorithm, parents may advocate that the school does not provide age-appropriate education services as agreed in accordance with Article 577 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, and require adjustment of teaching methods or compensation for losses."

"But such litigation has few precedents in judicial practice, because causation is difficult to prove. The decline in learning motivation may be due to multiple factors such as family, social, etc., and it is difficult to attribute it to AI use alone. When lawyers represent such cases, they usually need to introduce expert witnesses in educational psychology, and establish a causal chain by vertically comparing students' scores before and after using AI and psychological evaluation data. Even so, the court may dismiss the request on the grounds that u201ceducational effects are not the subject of a legal evaluation.u201d"

"A more viable path is an administrative complaint. Parents can report to the education authorities that the school is overly dependent on AI and neglects the mental health of students. According to Article 70 of the Law on the Protection of Minors, the school is required to correct inappropriate teaching behavior. In 2024, some parents have complained to the Education Bureau because their children are addicted to AI learning tablets, resulting in vision loss and school fatigue. Finally, the school adjusted the use time of the equipment. This shows that administrative supervision is more practical in protecting students' rights and interests."

"Compliance Responsibility and Risk Prevention for Educational Technology Enterprises"

"For companies developing AI education products, legal risks focus on algorithmic ethics and content compliance. According to Article 7 of the Interim Measures for the Administration of Generative Artificial Intelligence Services, generative AI service providers must ensure that the content is positive and healthy, and must not induce users to indulge. If AI learning products are used for an extended period of time through incentive mechanisms and pushing irritating content, they may violate this regulation and face delisting, rectification or even revocation of permission."

"Enterprises also need to pay attention to intellectual property issues. AI-generated exercises and explanatory content that copy other people's textbooks will infringe copyright. Lawyers recommend that companies establish a content review mechanism, conduct manual sampling of AI outputs, and purchase copyright insurance to spread risk. In addition, enterprises should develop clear user agreements to clarify the auxiliary nature of AI and avoid exaggerated publicity. For example, if you claim that the "AI score increase rate is 90%" without empirical data, you will face administrative penalties in violation of Article 24 of the Advertising Law."

"In the long run, companies should proactively embrace compliance and embed legal review into the product development process. For example, u201cEducational Value Assessmentu201d metrics are introduced when designing algorithms to avoid the simple pursuit of user retention. This can not only reduce legal risks, but also conform to the country's "double reduction" policy orientation and win market trust."

"Lawyer's Suggestion: Building a Legal Guardrail for the AI Education Ecosystem"

"AI on campus is a trend, but it must be placed within the legal framework. For schools, it is recommended to establish a negative list of AI applications, explicitly prohibit the collection of biological information not related to teaching, and conduct regular data security training. For parents, if they find that their child has obvious emotional problems after using AI, they should keep chat records, study reports, communicate with the school in a timely manner, and consult a professional lawyer if necessary. For enterprises, a Chief Compliance Officer should be established to conduct regular legal audits to ensure product compliance from design to operation."

"Guangdong Zhi Ming Law Firm has long been concerned about the legal practice in the intersection of science and technology and education, and has represented many cases of data infringement of minors. We can provide AI product procurement contract review for schools, algorithm compliance assessment for enterprises, and rights protection strategy guidance for parents. AI is the tool, law is the boundary, and only by innovating within the rules can technology truly serve the essence of education - inspiring, not stifling, enthusiasm for learning. If you encounter legal confusion in the use of educational AI, please contact us and we will protect the rights of each learner with professional strength."