Tokyo Court Rules AI Voice Cloning Violates Publicity Rights in Landmark Case Against TikTok

Tokyo District Court Establishes Legal Protection for Human Voices

In a landmark decision on Wednesday, the Tokyo District Court ruled that human voices are legally protected under publicity rights in Japan, marking the country's first judicial recognition of vocal identity protection against AI-generated copies1

1

2

2

. Presiding Judge Aya Takahashi declared that "the unauthorized use of a performer's voice can be considered an infringement on publicity rights," establishing that voices are "as symbolic of one's personality as portraits are"1

1

. The ruling specifically applies when "the purpose of using that voice is exclusively to take advantage of its commercial appeal," providing a clear framework for protecting vocal identity from AI voice cloning2

2

.

Kenjiro Tsuda's Groundbreaking TikTok AI Case

The case centered on Kenjiro Tsuda, the renowned anime voice actor best known for voicing Kento Nanami in Jujutsu Kaisen and roles in Yu-Gi-Oh!, who sued TikTok in November over 188 videos posted between July 2024 and September 20251

1

4

4

. Tsuda claimed the videos featured an AI-generated clone of his distinctive "deep" and "lustrous" baritone voice1

1

2

2

. The anonymous TikTok account, whose profile picture resembled Tsuda's Jujutsu Kaisen character, combined images with AI-generated speech discussing urban legends, occult phenomena, and conspiracy theories1

1

2

2

. At its peak, the account attracted over 200,000 subscribers with videos averaging 1.47 million views each, generating between ¥500,000 ($3,100) and ¥750,000 in estimated monthly revenue1

1

4

4

.

Voice Rights Infringement and AI Mimicry Concerns

Tsuda's legal team argued that the account gained traction solely because "its dubious, sordid content was narrated by the attractive voice of a popular actor," and presented voice data analysis concluding the distinctive baritone was intentionally created using generative AI2

2

4

4

. TikTok countered that the voice was merely a "generic male voice" created by having generative AI learn a friend's voice, arguing any perceived similarities were highly subjective1

1

4

4

. While the Tokyo court ruling validated Tsuda's claims about voice rights infringement, it dismissed his request for video removal since the user had deleted them shortly after the suit was filed1

1

4

4

. Tsuda's lawyer Takashi Hirano acknowledged the ruling "ended up making both sides look victorious"2

2

.

Implications for Japan's Animation Industry and Human Voice Protection

This lawsuit represents Japan's first legal attempt to defend vocal identity against AI-generated copies, addressing mounting concerns within the country's storied animation industry where voice actors achieve star status comparable to their characters2

2

3

3

. Yuko Sasaki, executive director of the Japan Actors Union, emphasized that an actor's voice "is the result of years of rigorous training and apprenticeship" and "something we spend lots of time and money perfecting"1

1

2

2

. In 2024, Japanese actors launched the "No More" campaign opposing unauthorized use of their faces and voices in AI-generated content1

1

. Actor Bin Shimada warned that "our industry can be crushed" if "unbridled" AI mimicry spreads unchecked on social media2

2

. The Justice Ministry's panel of experts released guidelines in August stating that voices, like images, should be protected under publicity rights, providing regulatory backing for the Tokyo court ruling4

4

.

TikTok's Response and Future Technology Development

TikTok stated it would "respect the court's judgment while considering what steps to take after scrutinizing details" of the ruling, adding that the platform will "continue to sincerely work on the balance between technology development and rights protection"1

1

2

2

. This landmark decision establishes critical precedent for balancing AI innovation with performer rights protection, particularly as AI voice cloning technology becomes increasingly sophisticated and accessible. The ruling's recognition of commercial appeal as the determining factor for publicity rights protection provides clarity for future cases involving unauthorized use of actor's voice and AI-generated content. As generative AI continues advancing, this case signals that platforms and content creators must obtain permission before using distinctive vocal characteristics that carry commercial value, setting a standard that could influence similar legal frameworks globally for protecting vocal identity in the age of AI mimicry.