AI voice packs that mimic the voices of public figures are selling well on online platforms; The automatically generated 'digital person' speaks incessantly in the live broadcast room; The voice, appearance, and smile of deceased figures have been "digitally resurrected"... In the digital age, artificial intelligence technology can imitate, replicate, and even "create" a person's voice, image, and even personality fragments. So, how can we better protect the "unique" personality rights? The independent compilation of personality rights is an important innovation in China's Civil Code. Over the past five years since the implementation of the Civil Code, the compilation of personality rights has provided strong legal support for the comprehensive protection of personal dignity, playing an important role in preventing insults, defamation, and abuse of image. However, when images are deeply forged, voices are intelligently synthesized, personalities are replicated by algorithms, and violations of personality rights extend from the physical world to the digital space, the traditional boundaries of rights and infringement recognition models urgently need to be updated. The strength and methods of rights protection also need to keep up with the times in order to build a legal barrier for the protection of personality rights in the digital age. Judicial practice undertakes the task of pioneering exploration. Some judicial rulings have determined that the voice rights of natural persons can be extended to AI generated voices, and the use of AI software to create "digital virtual human" images of others or to parody or vilify their portraits constitutes infringement of portrait rights. The "AI face swapping" of videos containing other people's portraits constitutes an infringement of the personal information rights of others. These explorations convey a clear signal: as long as the application of technology constitutes a substantial infringement of personality rights, it should be regulated and punished by law. In the face of constantly emerging new technological forms, it is necessary to summarize and extract judgment rules from specific cases within the existing legal framework, continuously clarify the criteria for judging new types of infringement, and ensure that technological innovation always proceeds on the track of respecting personal rights. Strengthening the protection of personality rights in the digital age should focus on balancing diverse interests and promoting a positive interaction between personality rights and technological innovation. For example, for the "digital resurrection" technology, multiple demands are often intertwined: respect for the deceased, emotions of relatives, exploration by researchers, value of commercial development, and even public historical memory. The significance of the rule of law lies in distinguishing scenarios reasonably and defining rules clearly. For behaviors that are directly used for defamation and other malicious infringement of personal dignity, a clear red line must be drawn and severe punishment must be imposed. For some purposes such as commemoration, specific artistic expression, historical research, and public interest, a standardized path of "reasonable use" can be explored while strictly following the principles of informed consent, minimum necessity, and respect for public order and good customs. In situations involving public figures, the focus should be on factors such as whether the purpose is legitimate and whether it exceeds necessary limits, in order to seek a careful balance between the protection of personality rights and social public interests such as public awareness and public opinion supervision. To strengthen the protection of personality rights in the digital age, it is necessary to collaborate with multiple parties, standardize and guide the application of technology towards excellence. The law not only sets an unbreakable red line, but also provides a basis for victims to protect their rights by clarifying tort liability and remedies. The platform should become a frontier "outpost", not only strictly implementing the prominent labeling obligation of deep synthesized content to make "AI generation" clear at a glance, but also actively establishing an efficient monitoring and auditing mechanism to warn and intercept high-risk content. Developers need to integrate ethical considerations into the entire process of technology design and development, establish internal ethical review mechanisms, and embed value principles that respect human dignity at the source of the product. For the public, it is necessary to continuously enhance their awareness of digital rights. They should not only learn to identify technological risks and protect personal rights, but also adhere to the bottom line when participating in dissemination to avoid becoming the "transmitter" of infringement. Building a legal barrier for the protection of human rights in the digital era is not only a firm defense of human dignity, but also an important part of the sustainable and healthy development of the Internet. Only by clarifying boundaries, balancing interests, and building consensus on the track of the rule of law can technology develop upwards and towards goodness while respecting and protecting people, and continuously unleash innovative vitality. (New Society)