AI虚拟人"方桃子"因代言美瞳产品发布虚假宣传内容引发公众关注[1]。该虚拟人宣称美瞳产品"戴了一天都很舒服""眨眼不偏移"[1]，相关广告已全网下架，安徽滁州有关部门已介入处理[1]。
争议的焦点在于AI数字人本身不具备产品实际体验能力。由于虚拟人根本不存在试戴、佩戴产品的客观体验[1]，其代言内容难以确保真实性。与此同时，AI数字人不具备独立法律人格，按照《广告法》规定，广告代言人仅限自然人、法人或其他组织[1]，这导致存在"有人带货、无人担责"的问题。广告内容的真实性责任应归于品牌方、虚拟IP运营公司与平台方[1]。
为规范虚拟IP的商业化应用，相关建议包括：完善AI生成内容的强制标识制度、建立数字人备案机制，以及针对涉及人身安全的产品品类出台专项约束条款[1]。相关人士认为需在监管层面完善法规细则，品牌理性投放，共同构建人机互补的良性生态[1]。
An artificial intelligence virtual influencer named "Fang Taozi" sparked controversy after endorsing contact lens products with unsubstantiated claims, prompting widespread scrutiny of AI-generated advertising practices [1]. The virtual persona claimed the lenses were "comfortable to wear all day" and "do not shift when blinking," assertions that triggered public backlash [1]. Following the controversy, the advertisement was removed from all platforms, and relevant authorities in Chuzhou, Anhui initiated an investigation [1].
The incident has exposed significant gaps in current regulatory frameworks governing AI-generated content. The core issue centers on the fact that AI digital avatars have no actual experience using products they promote, yet lack legal accountability [1]. Under existing advertising law, endorsers are limited to natural persons, legal entities, or other organizations—a definition that does not clearly encompass AI virtual entities [1]. This creates a problematic scenario where advertisements circulate with promotional claims but no clear party bears legal responsibility [1]. The accountability for advertising authenticity rests with the brand, the virtual IP operator, and the platform [1].
Industry experts and regulators have called for comprehensive reforms to address these gaps. Proposed measures include mandatory labeling systems for AI-generated content, establishing a registration mechanism for digital avatars, and introducing specific restrictions on AI endorsements for products related to personal safety [1]. These steps aim to create a framework that ensures transparency while protecting consumers from misleading claims made by entities incapable of genuine product experience [1].