Skip to main content
NOPE
Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed

Hangzhou Internet Court rules a skincare seller used AI face swap and voice synthesis to fake a beauty blogger's sales videos, awarding damages

A CCTV News report of 29 September 2026 says the Hangzhou Internet Court in Zhejiang recently concluded a portrait-rights case brought by a beauty blogger. According to the report, from June 2024 an online skincare-sales company, without the blogger's consent, took short videos and livestream footage the blogger had published and used AI synthesis to make more than 30 fake videos in which the blogger appeared to promote its products. The court found that the company had used AI face swap and the recombination of image and sound tracks to fabricate the videos for commercial gain, infringing the blogger's portrait rights. In court the company acknowledged that it had synthesised and published the videos without the blogger's authorisation, said staff had made them out of fun and curiosity, and said it had taken them all down after receiving the lawsuit papers. The court ordered the company to pay 15,000 yuan for economic loss and the costs of protecting the blogger's rights and 5,000 yuan in compensation for emotional distress, and to publish an apology prominently on the platform concerned for at least 30 days. The blogger's claim that the products sold more than 100,000 orders was not accepted as proof of loss or profit.

AI system
Unidentified face-swap and voice-synthesis tool
Occurred
Jun 2024
Reported
29 September 2026
Event location
Unknown
What the AI did
Depicted or impersonated the person
Reported harm
Exploitation or AbusePsychological Distress
Whose AI use
Someone else’s AI use
Setting
Work · Justice
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source
7 claims: 7 reported. 3 open questions
People reported harmed
1 person

AI system as recorded: AI face swap and other deep synthesis, combining a synthesised head image with sound tracks, used by a skincare-sales company to fabricate promotional videos of the blogger, according to the Hangzhou Internet Court (tools not identified)

What Happened

The videos. According to the CCTV News report, the plaintiff is a beauty blogger who shares beauty knowledge on short-video platforms and regularly sells products by livestream. The defendant is an online technology company that mainly sells skincare products. The blogger found that from June 2024 the company, without the blogger's consent, had taken short videos and livestream footage the blogger had published on various platforms and used AI synthesis to make more than 30 fake videos promoting its products.

The court's findings on the AI use. A judge's assistant at the Hangzhou Internet Court told CCTV that the company used several techniques, including AI face swap and other deep synthesis combining a synthesised head image with sound tracks. The court found that the company had not simply edited footage but layered several AI deep-synthesis techniques to create the false impression that the blogger personally appeared in and recommended its products. The report says the synthesised videos closely matched the blogger's picture, face and voice, so that ordinary consumers could hardly tell them apart.

The parties' positions. The blogger said the videos were pushed out in batches to draw traffic to the company's shop and that the two products concerned sold more than 100,000 orders with turnover of more than 7.4 million yuan. In court the company acknowledged that it had synthesised and published the videos without the blogger's authorisation, but said its staff had made them out of fun and curiosity, that it had taken all of them down after receiving the lawsuit papers, and that its sales were unrelated to the blogger's likeness.

The ruling. Citing Article 1019 of the Civil Code, the court held that the company had used AI face swap and the recombination of sound and image to fabricate the blogger's sales videos for commercial gain, infringing the blogger's portrait rights. Because the blogger's evidence did not prove the blogger's actual loss or the company's profit, the court set compensation of 15,000 yuan for economic loss and rights-protection costs and 5,000 yuan for emotional distress, and ordered a prominent apology on the platform concerned for at least 30 days.

What is not known. The report gives no judgment date, does not name the company, the platform or the AI tools, and does not say whether the ruling was appealed. The CCTV original was not located; the record rests on a full-text relay of it.

Reported harm

According to the CCTV News report of the ruling, a skincare seller used AI face swap and voice synthesis to make more than 30 fake videos in which a beauty blogger appeared to promote its products; the Hangzhou Internet Court found the blogger's portrait rights infringed and awarded the blogger compensation for emotional distress as well as economic loss.

Outcome

Resolved

The Hangzhou Internet Court found infringement of the blogger's portrait rights and ordered the company to pay 15,000 yuan for economic loss and rights-protection costs and 5,000 yuan for emotional distress, and to publish an apology prominently on the platform concerned for at least 30 days. The report does not give the judgment date or say whether either party appealed.

What remains unknown

  • The date of the judgment and whether either party appealed.
  • Which AI tools and which platform were used, and how long the videos stayed online.
  • The CCTV original and the judgment text were not inspected.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. The Hangzhou Internet Court, as reported by CCTV News, found that the company used AI face swap and the recombination of image and sound tracks to fabricate more than 30 videos in which the blogger appeared to recommend its skincare products, and the company acknowledged in court that it had synthesised and published the videos without the blogger's authorisation. The court found that this infringed the blogger's portrait rights and awarded the blogger compensation including 5,000 yuan for emotional distress. The AI tools are not identified.

7 claims: 7 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported CCTV News reported on 29 September 2026 that the Hangzhou Internet Court had recently concluded a portrait-rights case over AI deep synthesis brought by a beauty blogger against an online skincare-sales company.

Causal attribution. Existence of the case as reported by the state broadcaster; no judgment text inspected.

Reported According to the report, from June 2024 the company, without the blogger's consent, took the blogger's published short videos and livestream footage and used AI synthesis to make more than 30 fake videos promoting its products.

Causal attribution. Facts as found and reported; the AI synthesis is the direct cause of the fabricated videos.

Reported The court found that the company used AI face swap and the recombination of sound and image, layering several deep-synthesis techniques, to fabricate the videos for commercial gain, and that this infringed the blogger's portrait rights.

Causal attribution. Court finding as reported; the court attributes the fabrication to AI deep synthesis.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '被告借助AI换脸、音画重组等深度合成技术，批量伪造博主'; '的带货视频，谋取商业利益，侵权主观过错明确，构成对原告'; '肖像权的侵害'
Reported A judge's assistant at the court said the techniques included AI face swap and other deep synthesis combining a head image with sound tracks.

Causal attribution. Court official's description of the AI techniques.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '其中既有AI换脸，也包括其他深度合成，如头像画面以及声音音轨等组合方式'
Reported In court the company acknowledged that it had synthesised and published the videos without the blogger's authorisation, but said staff made them out of fun and curiosity and that it took them all down after receiving the lawsuit papers.

Causal attribution. Defendant's admission and defences as reported.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '庭审中，被告当庭认可视频为其合成发布，且未取得原告授权' ... '公司在收到诉讼材料后已主动下架全部侵权视频'
Reported The court ordered the company to pay 15,000 yuan for economic loss and rights-protection costs and 5,000 yuan for emotional distress, and to publish an apology prominently on the platform concerned for at least 30 days.

Causal attribution. Outcome as reported.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '综合酌定被告赔偿原告经济损失及维权费用15000元，赔偿原告精神损害赔偿金5000元，并判令被告在涉案平台显著位置刊登致歉声明、持续时间不得少于30日'
Reported The blogger claimed that the videos drew traffic to the company's shop and that the two products concerned sold more than 100,000 orders with turnover above 7.4 million yuan; the court found the blogger's evidence did not prove the blogger's actual loss or the company's profit.

Causal attribution. Plaintiff's claim, with the court's finding that it did not prove loss or profit.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '两款涉案护肤品累计销量突破十万单，营业额高达740余万元' ... '证据不足以证明其因侵权行为造成的实际损失或被告某网络科技公司的获利情况'

Sources

1 source inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Read in Chinese by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-26; English renderings are the agent's own translation. ipeconomy.cn page stating its source as CCTV News (央视新闻), dated 29 Sep 2026, carrying the full report text; HTTP 200. The CCTV original was not located. Applies to s1.

Event countries: Unknown. Affected-person countries: Unknown. Court countries: China.

The case was decided by the Hangzhou Internet Court in Zhejiang, China, so CN is the court country. The report does not state where the company operated or published the videos or where the blogger lives, so no event or affected-person country is recorded from the court's seat.

Reviewed for publication 2026-10-26: Published as a core case (depicted_or_impersonated): a Chinese court found that a skincare seller used AI face swap and voice synthesis to fabricate a beauty blogger's promotional videos without consent, the seller admitted making them, and the court awarded the blogger damages including compensation for emotional distress. The record rests on one relay of the CCTV News report; the blogger and company are not named.

People described

A beauty blogger who shares beauty knowledge on short-video platforms and sells products through livestreams; the blogger's face and voice were synthesised into more than 30 promotional videos for a company the blogger had not authorised

People reported harmed in this case

1 person

0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed

One person: the blogger who brought the case and whose likeness and voice the court found were synthesised into the videos. Viewers and buyers of the products are not counted because no harm to them is reported.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Tags

#ai-face-swap#deep-synthesis#voice-synthesis#portrait-rights#livestream-commerce#court-ruling#china

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). Hangzhou Internet Court rules a skincare seller used AI face swap and voice synthesis to fake a beauty blogger's sales videos, awarding damages. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2024-hangzhou-internet-court-rules-skincare-seller-used-ai-face-swap-and-voice-synthesis-to-fake-beauty-bloggers-sales-videos

BibTeX

@misc{2024_hangzhou_internet_court_rules_skincare_seller_used_ai_face_swap_and_voice_synthesis_to_fake_beauty_bloggers_sales_videos,
  title = {Hangzhou Internet Court rules a skincare seller used AI face swap and voice synthesis to fake a beauty blogger's sales videos, awarding damages},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2024-hangzhou-internet-court-rules-skincare-seller-used-ai-face-swap-and-voice-synthesis-to-fake-beauty-bloggers-sales-videos}
}

Related cases

High Unidentified image tool

Jeju: police refer a middle-school student over secretly filming teachers and making sexual deepfake composites; teachers dispute victim count and legal aid

Jeju Dongbu police announced on 23 September 2026 that a student at a middle school on Jeju had been referred to prosecutors without detention on 17 September for violating the Sexual Violence Punishment Act (filming with a camera or similar device). The student's phone was voluntarily submitted by his guardians and forensically examined; the examination found footage relating to some teachers and some sexual composites, and the student admitted the conduct. News1 reported that the student was booked for filming a teacher's body with his phone during a school field trip around mid-July 2026, that the offending had continued for several months with multiple victims, and that police found no indication the composites had been distributed. Police told Seoul Shinmun there were more victim teachers than the one first reported but withheld the number to avoid secondary harm, and that no student at the school was a victim; the Jeju teachers' union questioned whether the full scope of harm had been established. According to the union, two months on the victim teachers were receiving hospital treatment and counselling while teaching daily, gave police statements on 14 September without a lawyer, attended the regional teachers' rights protection committee on 17 September without institutional support, wrote the criminal complaint themselves, and were offered 3.3 million won in legal fees for all of them together, payable after the case ends; two requests to meet the superintendent were not accepted. On 29 September one of the victim teachers gave a press interview at the Jeju Teachers' Union office. She said that early in the investigation she had seen on the student's phone material showing other teachers and current students, had made a list of the people and types of harm, and that the material shown to her at the police victim examination was considerably less than what she had seen; Yonhap-chain outlets quote her as saying the students she recognised numbered 10 to 20 and that a graduate had suffered worse deepfakes. She said investigators asked the school only to identify the perpetrator and never requested material to identify the students in the footage, and that the school sent parents a letter premised on there being no student victims. Police replied that phone forensics had been thorough, that every act beyond social norms had been identified and proven, and that one student victim had been confirmed, a student at a different school. The teachers were notified on 22 September that the case had gone to the prosecution and on 24 September that it had been sent to the court's juvenile division as a juvenile protection case, before they had submitted further evidence and a victim opinion. The teacher said the original complaint had also asked police to examine whether physical contact in 2025 was forcible molestation and whether repeated approaching and waiting in 2026 was stalking, and Halla Ilbo reports that such conduct is said to date from 2025. Yonhap-chain reports describe the charged victims as five teachers. The same day the education office briefed on legal-aid rules (up to 6.6 million won per instance when a teacher is sued, 3.3 million won per case when a teacher files a complaint; office lawyers cannot act as a teacher's private counsel), said it had linked the teachers to the national Digital Sexual Crime Victim Support Center, announced an integrated support system through a hotline, and its section head said the office was sorry that early support had not been felt. The KTU Jeju branch (28 September) and the Jeju Teachers' Union (14 and 29 September) demand a victim-support system, per-teacher legal fees paid in advance and a dedicated support team. On 6 October 2026 Seogwipo Broadcasting reported, citing people in education and a tipster, that the education authority had finally rejected the victim teachers' application for lawyer fees for an additional criminal complaint, saying in a written opinion that with a police investigation already under way a further complaint could hardly stop or prevent the infringement of their teaching, so the support requirements were not met; critics contrast this with full legal-cost support in earlier sexual-offence cases.

High Unidentified image tool

Incheon high-school student jailed for AI deepfake nude composites of his teachers posted online; a civil court later orders him to pay one teacher damages

In July 2024 a high-school student in Incheon, South Korea, composited the faces of two female teachers at his school and of others, including an academy senior and an instructor, onto nude photos and posted them on social media, according to the charges as reported by Yonhap, the Hankyoreh, the JoongAng Ilbo and the Kyunghyang Shinmun, which describe the technique as AI-based deepfake technology. He had also secretly photographed teachers in class. He was expelled after a teachers' rights committee hearing. On 27 August 2025 the Incheon District Court gave him an indeterminate prison term of one year to one year six months and took him into custody; the court said that as a result the victimised teacher had left teaching and had not returned. On 19 December 2025, after he had turned adult, the appeal division raised the sentence to three years, calling the offence close to 'character assassination' and the teachers' mental shock considerable; OBS reports the sentence is final. On 21 October 2026, according to the Incheon Teachers' Union, a civil judge at the Incheon District Court ordered him, now 20, to pay one teacher 17.7 million won of the roughly 72 million won she claimed.

High Unidentified image and video tool

Chennai: police say a man used AI to make obscene images of a woman colleague and posted them from a fake Instagram account tagged with her home location

Police in the Chennai area arrested a man in early May 2026 who, according to their investigation as reported by the Times of India, DT Next and Daily Thanthi, used AI to turn a woman colleague's display pictures into obscene images and videos, posted them from a fake Instagram account in her name, and tagged the posts with her home location. A friend alerted the woman to the account; she complained to an all-women police station, and police traced the posts to a colleague's phone. Daily Thanthi reports that he admitted under questioning to making the images with AI after a workplace dispute. DT Next reports that the account and posts were blocked and that he was remanded in judicial custody. The AI tool is not identified, and the date the posts began is not reported.

Medium Unidentified image and video tool

Thanh Hóa, Vietnam: police say nearly 20 people were threatened with fabricated sexual images of themselves unless they paid; one demand was 1.5 billion dong

Thanh Hóa provincial police said on 3 October 2026 that their cybersecurity and high-tech crime division had, since the start of October, received reports from nearly 20 people threatened with extortion using sexual images and videos spliced from their own photos, which senders threatened to publish unless money was transferred. One victim was asked for as much as 1.5 billion dong, and officials, including commune-level leaders, were among the targets. The police release says the material was made with technology; Báo Thanh Hóa, reporting information compiled from the same police division, says the senders used AI and deepfake technology to put victims' faces onto sexual images. No payment, arrest or named victim is reported.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents