Skip to main content
NOPE
Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed

Hangzhou court orders two men who used AI face-swap videos to defeat a shopping platform's face checks and take users' data to apologise and pay, reports say

Chinese media reports of September and October 2026 describe a civil public-interest suit that the Hangzhou procuratorate brought against two men in the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court in Zhejiang. According to the court as reported by CCTV News, the two took other people's ID-card photos supplied by an upstream trade in personal data and used an overseas face-swap website to turn them into AI-generated moving videos that nodded, blinked and shook their heads, then fed the videos through a virtual-camera app so that a shopping platform's face liveness check accepted them, letting the men log into other people's accounts. The prosecution said they entered nearly 30 accounts on one shopping platform and took users' delivery addresses and shopping-cart data, which were passed on for sale, and used the same AI technique to verify 20 chat and dating accounts under other people's identities for sale. CCTV also reports a second, non-AI method the men used to enter accounts and does not say how many of the accounts each method reached. After police caught them, the two stopped, returned 5,857 yuan in illegal gains and admitted the conduct, and prosecutors decided not to charge them criminally. In court they admitted abusing AI to infringe other people's personal information and apologised; Chao News reports that they also argued that the face information was generated automatically by AI. The court found that they had abused AI to forge liveness verification and steal and resell user data, and ordered a public apology and public-interest damages equal to their gains. A 26 October report, citing an earlier Chao News report, dates the hearing and first-instance judgment to 4 September 2026.

AI system
Unidentified video tool
Occurred
Event date unknown
Reported
18 September 2026
Event location
Unknown
What the AI did
Depicted or impersonated the person
Reported harm
Exploitation or AbuseOther Material Harm
Whose AI use
Someone else’s AI use
Setting
Privacy · Justice
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources
8 claims: 8 reported. 5 open questions
People reported harmed
Not reliably quantifiable from the sources

AI system as recorded: AI face-swap website (overseas, not named) used to turn other people's ID-card photos into moving face videos that defeated a shopping platform's liveness check, fed through a virtual-camera app, according to the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court as reported

What Happened

The method. According to CCTV News, which interviewed staff of the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court, two men took ID-card photos of other people supplied by an upstream trade in personal data and used an overseas face-swap website to generate moving videos of those faces performing the actions that face checks ask for, such as nodding, blinking and shaking the head. They installed a virtual-camera app on a phone, so that when a shopping platform opened the camera for its face liveness check, the screen was replaced with the generated video. A judge's assistant described the AI face swap as deep-learning software that extracts facial features from the photos and models them to produce videos simulating a real person. Chao News, summarising the court's case, says the two used AI to turn still photos into moving face-verification videos, logged into other people's accounts and took delivery addresses, purchase records and other private data for sale.

What was taken. The prosecution said the two entered nearly 30 accounts on one shopping platform and took users' delivery addresses and shopping-cart information, which they passed on for about 3,708 yuan in virtual currency, and later used the same AI face-swap technique to make fake liveness videos verifying 20 chat and dating accounts under other people's identities, which they sold for 2,149 yuan. CCTV also describes a second method the men used: installing outdated versions of shopping and dating apps and guessing users' security answers. The report does not say how many of the accounts were entered by each method.

Criminal and civil outcome. Police caught the two; they stopped, returned 5,857 yuan in illegal gains and admitted the conduct, and prosecutors decided not to charge them criminally. The Hangzhou procuratorate then brought a civil public-interest suit for personal-information protection. In court the two admitted abusing AI to infringe other people's personal information and apologised to the victims and the public. Chao News reports that they argued the face information had been generated automatically by AI, and that the court answered that the tool did not change the unlawful nature of their conduct. The court found that, without permission, they had abused AI to forge liveness verification, processed large amounts of personal information and stolen and resold user data, infringing the personal-information rights of unspecified people. It ordered a public apology and public-interest damages equal to their gains. A 26 October 2026 Jiemian report, citing an earlier Chao News report, says the hearing and first-instance judgment took place on 4 September 2026.

What is not known. The reports do not name the shopping platform, the face-swap website or the affected users, do not say when the conduct took place, and do not report any loss or other consequence for an individual user beyond the taking and sale of their data. The judgment text and the CCTV original were not inspected, and the Chao News report that dates the hearing was not located.

Reported harm

According to reports of the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court case, two men used AI-generated moving videos made from other people's ID photos to pass a shopping platform's face liveness check, entered users' accounts and took delivery addresses and shopping data for sale, and verified chat and dating accounts under other people's identities; the court found the personal-information rights of unspecified people infringed.

Outcome

Resolved

Prosecutors decided not to bring criminal charges after the two returned 5,857 yuan in illegal gains and admitted the conduct. In the civil public-interest suit brought by the Hangzhou procuratorate, the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court ordered the two to apologise publicly and pay public-interest damages equal to their gains, to be used by prosecutors for personal-information protection and the governance of misused face deep synthesis. A 26 October 2026 report, citing an earlier Chao News report, says the court heard the case in open court on 4 September 2026 and gave the first-instance judgment at the hearing. No report says whether either side appealed.

What remains unknown

  • When the conduct took place.
  • How many people were affected; the prosecution's figures count accounts, and some accounts were entered by a non-AI method.
  • Which shopping platform and which face-swap website were involved.
  • Whether either side appealed; the judgment text was not inspected.
  • Whether any affected user suffered a loss beyond the taking and sale of their data.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. Staff of the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court told CCTV News that the two men used an overseas face-swap website to turn other people's ID-card photos into AI-generated moving videos that passed a shopping platform's face liveness check, letting them log into other people's accounts; the court found that they had abused AI to forge liveness verification and steal and resell user data, and the men admitted in court that they had abused AI to infringe other people's personal information. The generated videos impersonated the people whose ID photos were used; the reports do not say whether those people held the shopping accounts entered. The face-swap website is not named, and CCTV also describes a second, non-AI login method without saying how many accounts each method reached.

8 claims: 8 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported The Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court heard a civil public-interest suit, brought by the Hangzhou procuratorate, over two men who used AI face swap to defeat liveness verification and illegally take and trade personal information.

Causal attribution. Existence of the suit as reported; the judgment text was not inspected.

Reported According to the court as reported, the two used an overseas face-swap website to turn other people's ID-card photos into AI-generated moving videos and, with a virtual-camera app, bypassed a platform's liveness check to log into other people's shopping accounts.

Causal attribution. The AI-generated face videos are the means by which the accounts were entered, as described by court staff and the court's case summary.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '把上游黑灰产提供的他人身份证照片，通过境外换脸网站，借助AI技术生成仿真活体动态视频，再结合虚拟相机的使用，从而绕过平台活体验证程序，破解登录他人购物平台账号'
  • tidenews.com.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '利用AI技术将静态照片合成为动态人脸认证视频，非法登录他人网络账号，窃取收货地址、消费记录等隐私数据并对外出售'
Reported The prosecution said the two entered nearly 30 accounts on one shopping platform and passed on users' delivery addresses and shopping-cart data, and later used the same AI face-swap technique to make fake liveness videos verifying 20 accounts for sale.

Causal attribution. Prosecution's account as reported; CCTV also describes a second, non-AI login method and does not split the accounts between methods.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '两被告先后非法登录近30个某购物平台账号，窃取用户收货地址、购物车信息等隐私数据对外流转' ... '利用同款AI换脸技术制作虚假活体视频，违规认证账号20个，并出售牟利2149元'
Reported The court found that the two had, without permission, abused AI technology to forge liveness verification, processed large amounts of personal information and stolen and resold user data, infringing the personal-information rights of unspecified people.

Causal attribution. Court's finding as summarised by Chao News.

  • tidenews.com.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '滥用AI技术伪造活体认证、非法处理海量公民个人信息并窃取倒卖用户数据，不仅侵害了不特定主体的个人信息权益'
Reported After police caught them, the two stopped, returned 5,857 yuan in illegal gains and admitted the conduct, and prosecutors decided not to charge them criminally.

Causal attribution. Criminal outcome as reported.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '被公安机关查获后也立即停止侵权、退回违法所得5857元，且自愿认罪认罚，检察机关综合考量案件情节，依法对二人作出刑事不起诉决定'
Reported In court the two admitted abusing AI to infringe other people's personal information and apologised to the victims and the public; Chao News reports that they also argued the face information was generated automatically by AI, which the court rejected as a defence.

Causal attribution. Defendants' admission and defence as reported by two outlets; the two passages describe different statements, so the claim stays reported.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '两被告对自己滥用AI技术侵犯他人个人信息的行为供认不讳，当庭向广大受害群众和社会公众致歉'
  • tidenews.com.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '辩称人脸信息是AI自动生成。但法院明确指出，技术的工具属性不改变行为的违法本质'
Reported The court ordered the two to apologise publicly and pay public-interest damages equal to their gains, to be used by prosecutors for personal-information protection and the governance of misused face deep synthesis.

Causal attribution. Outcome as reported; the two outlets give different parts of it.

  • ipeconomy.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '判令二被告公开赔礼道歉，并支付和犯罪所得相当的公益损害赔偿金'
  • tidenews.com.cn(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '该笔赔偿金由检察机关专门用于个人信息保护、人脸深度合成技术不当应用的治理等公益事项'
Reported A 26 October 2026 Jiemian report, citing an earlier Chao News report, says the court heard the case in open court on 4 September 2026 and gave the first-instance judgment at the hearing.

Causal attribution. Date of the hearing and judgment as relayed by Jiemian from an uninspected Chao News report.

  • m.sohu.com(opens in new tab) supports · Chinese
    '今年9月4日，杭州中院公开开庭审理一起涉“AI换脸”个人信息保护公益诉讼案，并当庭作出一审判决'

Sources

3 sources 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 and again on 2026-10-27; English renderings are the agent's own translation. ipeconomy.cn page stating its source as CCTV News, dated 29 Sep 2026, carrying the full report with statements by Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court staff; HTTP 200. The CCTV original was not located. Applies to s1.

Read in Chinese by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-27; English renderings are the agent's own translation. Post by the Hangzhou courts account (杭州法院) on Chao News, published 2026-09-18 10:01 Beijing time, carrying a Democracy and Legal System Times (民主与法制时报) report that summarises three typical online-infringement public-interest cases for the 14-20 September 2026 cybersecurity week; HTTP 200. Applies to s2.

Read in Chinese by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-27; English renderings are the agent's own translation. Sohu copy credited to Jiemian News, published 26 Oct 2026; its date for the hearing cites an earlier Chao News report that was not located; HTTP 200. Applies to s3.

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

The case was decided by the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court in Zhejiang, China, so CN is the court country. The reports do not name the platform or say where the men operated or where the affected users live, so no event or affected-person country is recorded from the court's seat.

Reviewed for publication 2026-10-27: Published as a core case (depicted_or_impersonated): a Chinese court found that two men used AI-generated face videos made from other people's ID photos to defeat a shopping platform's liveness check, enter users' accounts and take their personal data for sale, the men admitted abusing AI in court, and the court ordered an apology and public-interest damages. The record rests on reports of the court case; the people involved are not named.

People described

Users of a shopping platform whose accounts the two men entered after AI-generated face videos passed the liveness check, and whose delivery addresses and shopping data were taken and passed on for sale; people whose ID photos were used to verify chat and dating accounts sold to others. The number of people is not reported.

People reported harmed in this case

Not reliably quantifiable from the sources

No reliable count of people. The prosecution's figures are accounts (nearly 30 shopping accounts entered and 20 chat and dating accounts verified), and CCTV says some accounts were entered by a second, non-AI method without giving the split; accounts are not counted as people.

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

Tags

#ai-face-swap#liveness-check-bypass#identity-verification#personal-data-theft#public-interest-litigation#court-ruling#china

Cite this case

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

APA

NOPE. (2026). Hangzhou court orders two men who used AI face-swap videos to defeat a shopping platform's face checks and take users' data to apologise and pay, reports say. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-hangzhou-court-orders-two-men-who-used-ai-face-swap-videos-to-defeat-shopping-platform-face-checks-and-take-users-data-to-apologise

BibTeX

@misc{2026_hangzhou_court_orders_two_men_who_used_ai_face_swap_videos_to_defeat_shopping_platform_face_checks_and_take_users_data_to_apologise,
  title = {Hangzhou court orders two men who used AI face-swap videos to defeat a shopping platform's face checks and take users' data to apologise and pay, reports say},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-hangzhou-court-orders-two-men-who-used-ai-face-swap-videos-to-defeat-shopping-platform-face-checks-and-take-users-data-to-apologise}
}

Related cases

Medium Unidentified video tool

Rajasthan: a social-media influencer's video of a Ganga dip at Haridwar was manipulated with AI into an objectionable reel that went viral; she says she is mentally disturbed and cannot leave her house, and filed a cyber-crime complaint on 16 September 2026

A Rajasthan social-media influencer visited Haridwar with her family in June 2026 and on 6 June uploaded to Instagram a short video, recorded by relatives, of herself taking a dip in the Ganga at Har Ki Pauri wearing a salwar suit. About two months later she found that the video had been manipulated with AI into an objectionable version showing the same movements with her face and body portrayed 'in a shameful manner'; the fake reel went viral in the week before 20 September and drew objectionable comments and re-sharing. In a public appeal she asked whoever uploaded it to remove it, saying it was a matter of her dignity, that she was mentally very disturbed and had reached a point where she could not step out of her house. She filed a complaint with the cyber-crime police on 16 September 2026; the investigating Rajasthan Police Service officer said they were trying to identify who created and circulated the video and to have it removed, and that identifying the accused would take time. Dainik Bhaskar's English edition reported the case on 20 September in a 'Sunday Big Story' that does not name her.

Medium Unidentified video tool

Jamui, Bihar: police registered a case in September 2026 against a social media user over AI-generated videos of a minor girl who had been sexually harassed and her friend, saying the videos were fake and revealed the girl's identity

A minor girl was sexually harassed and her male friend assaulted by a group in Jamui district, Bihar, on 19 September 2026; a video of the incident spread on social media two days later and the police apprehended several of the accused. According to a Jamui police statement issued on 25 September and reported by the Press Trust of India, the police then registered a case at the cyber police station against a social media user for uploading several AI-generated videos of the girl and her friend. The police called the videos misleading and fake and said they revealed the girl's identity and could affect social harmony; the case was registered under the BNS, the POCSO Act, the Juvenile Justice Act and the IT Act. Separately, The Quint reported finding dozens of AI-generated recreations of the assault on Instagram, almost all revealing identifying details, and quoted the Jamui superintendent of police as saying that some people were making AI-generated content. No outcome of the case against the uploader has been reported.

Medium Unidentified video tool

Hampton, New Hampshire: police say a Massachusetts man harassed a Hampton resident for more than a year and posted an AI-generated deepfake video showing the resident being arrested and jailed, events police say never happened; he was indicted on four felony counts of fraudulent use of deepfakes and is held after his bail was revoked

Hampton police say a man from Worcester, Massachusetts harassed a Hampton resident for more than a year through phone calls, texts, emails and online posts, stemming from a perceived past disagreement, and kept going after the victim asked him to stop and after he was served with a stalking order of protection in October 2025. In November 2025 the victim showed police an AI-generated deepfake video that, according to the arrest-warrant affidavit, the man created to humiliate and defame him; it shows the victim being arrested and jailed and includes a structure resembling the victim's Hampton home and images of real people. A police sergeant said the depicted events never happened and that the video was posted on YouTube. A Rockingham County grand jury indicted the man on four Class B felony counts of fraudulent use of deepfakes under RSA 638:26-a, for creating, distributing and presenting a video of an identifiable person on 20 October, 31 October, 7 November and 13 November 2025. He turned himself in on 24 March, was released on bail, was arrested again on 26 August for alleged bail violations and is held at the Rockingham County House of Corrections. Police had the video removed. The AI tool is not named and the victim's own account is relayed only through the police.

Medium Unidentified image tool

Amsterdam court jails man who used deepfake technology to pass a bank's face check with other people's IDs and open 47 accounts in their names

The Amsterdam District Court said in March 2026 that a 34-year-old man was suspected of opening 47 bank accounts in other people's names between 20 March and 14 November 2025 by using deepfake technology to mislead a bank's identity-verification system. At the hearing on 17 March 2026, the prosecution said he had beaten ABN AMRO's app check, which compares a face scan with the photo on an identity document, by replacing ID photos with his own and by adjusting his own face photos to resemble the ID photos; the judge noted that a selfie submitted with one woman's identity document showed features of her passport photo. The prosecution said identity documents of the victims in whose names accounts were opened were found on his phone. The man denied knowing of the fraud before late September 2025, and the court reopened the investigation on 31 March to examine his phone data. According to AT5, on 17 June 2026 the court sentenced him to two and a half years in prison, six months of it suspended, and ordered him to pay 13,000 euros to ABN AMRO; AT5 reports that he pasted his victims' facial features onto his own face with AI and that some of the accounts were used for bank-helpdesk fraud and cash withdrawals.

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