Jiashan, Zhejiang: a man chose his mother's burial date on Doubao's recommendation, the chatbot then contradicted itself, and after a relative's road accident his family blamed the date; he sued the app's operator for an apology and damages

Jiaxing Media Centre's programme 'Xiaoxin Shuoshi' reported the case on 15 September 2026; Sina carried the interview transcript on 16 September and Labour Daily, China.com, Sohu, The Paper and Huashang Daily relayed or added to it. The man's mother died of a sudden illness in Shuyang, Jiangsu, on 17 April 2026 and he returned home; the family had engaged a feng-shui master who chose 20 April, but he objected that burial on the fourth day, an even number, broke local custom (burial on the third day). He asked Doubao when his mother, who 'died today', should be buried; the app's answer, shown in the report, recommended 19 April as the safest choice under local custom and the almanac, and he persuaded his relatives to follow it. Some time later he asked what hour was suitable; Doubao answered 7 to 9 o'clock but added that 19 April was not an auspicious day, and repeated that when he asked several more times. Relatives had already been notified, so he went ahead on the 19th. Not long after the funeral a relative was seriously injured in a traffic accident, and family members said the wrong burial date had broken the feng shui; asked whether relatives blamed him, he said 'of course', and that they asked whether he had changed the date. He described himself as a daily Doubao user who trusted it and handed it contracts and documents. He said the app also told him he could sue and drafted the complaint step by step. Doubao's user agreement, quoted by the broadcaster and read by Huashang Daily in the app, says generated content is for reference only, should not be treated as professional advice, and that consequences of acting on it rest with the user; Sohu notes the chat interface also carries the label 'AI generation may contain errors, please verify'. Sohu and The Paper add that the operator is a wholly owned subsidiary of Beijing Douyin Information Service; Sohu adds that a user sued the same company in May 2026 claiming a 600-yuan loss from what the user said were incorrect ticket-refund rules given by Doubao. Huashang Daily's 21 September legal analysis notes that the self-contradictory answers are the likely focus of the fault question, that a date's auspiciousness is not a legally protected interest, and that the relative's injury has no legal causal link to the burial date.

The man relied on Doubao's recommendation for a consequential family decision and was left, after the app reversed itself too late to change the date, with a burial on a day his family considers inauspicious; relatives blamed him after a relative's later traffic accident and family relations became tense (his account to the Jiaxing broadcaster). The accident itself is the family's superstition-based attribution and is not treated here as a consequence of the AI advice.

The man complained to the Doubao operator and received no reply, then sued Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology Co., Ltd. for an apology and compensation (amount not disclosed). The case was heard by Jiashan County People's Court on 3 September 2026 as a network-tort liability dispute (Sohu; The Paper citing Tianyancha; Huashang Daily). At the hearing the company said there was no tort and no fault in its service; the plaintiff argued the user agreement is a standard-form contract that increases users' responsibility, that the warnings are inadequate and that sources are not vetted. No judgment had been reported by 21 September 2026. Lawyers quoted by the Jiaxing broadcaster and Huashang Daily said proving fault and causation would be difficult.