The Chinese authorities have been tightening internet control measures this year, with reports emerging from various regions of netizens being fined for using VPNs to bypass restrictions. A Hong Kong artist recently revealed that he had assisted a friend who was detained for using a VPN while in the mainland. After repeatedly explaining the legal definition of VPNs to the local police station and emphasizing their compliance, the individual was eventually released.
Hong Kong artist Huang Liao (real name Huang Xinghua) recently recorded a video in which he described the events of the day when he went to a police station in Shenzhen before 2 p.m. to help a friend who had been detained for using a VPN to access company activities while in the mainland.
He said, “After my repeated emphasis on the legal definition of VPNs, the police station leadership had no choice but to release the individual.”
According to mainland media reports, Huang Liao was born in mainland China and has had a passion for painting since childhood. He went to the UK for studies in 1988, moved to Hong Kong in 1993, and later established his own business in Shenzhen.
Huang Liao stated, “In fact, using VPN software to access restricted websites in China is absolutely legal. However, for a long time, citizens using VPN software to bypass restrictions have been punished as if it were illegal behavior, leading to fines or even detentions.”
He hopes that through this video, he can explain to mainland internet users his interpretation of the legal nature of using VPNs to bypass restrictions and question whether the related administrative penalties have sufficient legal basis.
Huang Liao first quoted Article 6 of the 1996 “Temporary Provisions on the Administration of International Networking of Computer Information Networks in China,” pointing out that law enforcement agencies often use the prohibition on “establishing or using other channels for international networking” as the basis for penalizing VPN usage, equating the use of VPNs to using “other channels.”
He raised doubts about this, stating that users do not physically lay cables themselves, and data still travels through the legitimate channels provided by the national public network when using VPNs. Therefore, the key lies in clarifying the definitions of “international gateway channels” and “other channels,” and VPN usage alone should not be directly deemed illegal.
He further cited Article 3 of the 1998 “Implementation Measures” to explain that regulations define the “international gateway channel” as physical infrastructure such as land cables, submarine cables, and satellite communications. VPNs are merely internet technology tools, and when users utilize VPNs, data still travels through legitimate physical lines established by domestic telecom operators to overseas proxy servers. Therefore, merely using a VPN should not directly be considered as creating or using other physical communication channels without authorization.
This individual was detained by a Chinese police station for using a VPN, but after he argued based on reason, the police station had no choice but to release him.
In order to further explain the official concept of “illegal channels,” Huang Liao in the video cited examples such as satellite internet services and privately laying submarine cables.
For example, if you use Elon Musk’s Starlink for internet access, or if your home router secretly lays a submarine cable directly to the United States for easier internet access, that is what the authorities refer to as an illegal channel.
In the latter part of the video, Huang Liao shifted the discussion focus to the legal understanding and professional competence of law enforcement agencies.
He believed that some law enforcement agencies directly link the use of VPNs to violations of regulations on international networking channels, indicating a possible deviation in the understanding of relevant legal provisions.
He said, “Therefore, all past cases of accessing restricted sites via VPN handled by law enforcement agencies nationwide have lacked legal basis, as it reflects a misinterpretation of the regulations by the law enforcement agencies.”
Huang Liao further expressed that some law enforcement agencies not only impose administrative penalties based on this but also publicize related cases as educational materials. In his view, if the legal provisions relied upon by law enforcement are not accurately understood, subsequent penalties and related publicity need to be reassessed.
He stated, “Why is that? It indicates that a considerable number of law enforcement agencies need to enhance their legal literacy and professional knowledge.”
Previously, mainland lawyer Pan Hexian also released a video analyzing whether using VPNs to access overseas websites violates the law, starting from the provisions on international networking channels.
Lawyer Pan Hexian stated that the key to the question of why individuals are fined for using VPNs to access restricted sites despite the claim that it is not illegal lies in distinguishing between prohibited activities under the regulations and individuals using VPNs to access overseas sites.
The regulations stipulate that international networking channels should not be privately established or used. He explained that what is prohibited here is the private laying of overseas cables or connections to satellites, etc., known as “privately established physical channels.” VPNs, however, create encrypted virtual channels that still communicate through the physical channels of the country’s three major telecom operators.
Therefore, Pan Hexian emphasized that merely using a VPN should not be considered illegal for individuals bypassing restrictions, as “simple personal usage of VPNs is not illegal.”
Apart from the professional analysis mentioned above, the reality of internet censorship and restrictions on bypassing restrictions is tightening.
This year, the Chinese authorities have continued to strengthen controls on people using VPNs to access overseas websites, with measures ranging from personal fines, home searches, to monitoring systems in universities being upgraded.
In April this year, former Shenzhen lawyer Zhou Junhong revealed that entrepreneur Shen Qijia was fined 500 yuan and given a written warning by the Dalian police for using a VPN to log into Telegram. In March, a man named Xu from Ezhou, Hubei, was also fined by the police for installing Clash to browse overseas platforms like TikTok and X.
Additionally, Gong, a person from Ningde, Fujian, who used a VPN in 2020, was still pursued and penalized in July 2024, indicating that enforcement can backtrack past records. In September, Harbin Engineering University issued warnings to 20 students using VPNs to access overseas networks. In July, Hunan Library announced that readers who bypassed public Wi-Fi were recorded for abnormal traffic by the cyber administration.
It is estimated that currently, there are around 30 to 40 million individuals in mainland China using VPNs to access overseas websites.
Gan Wenwei, a former mainland VPN software supplier now in exile in the Netherlands, previously told Epoch Times that since the current Chinese leader took office, internet censorship and restrictions have been increasingly stringent. Gan believed that if the Great Firewall were to be demolished, a large number of Chinese people would have access to more external information, potentially altering the perceptions of some who previously supported the authorities.