Skip to main content
NOPE
Low News report Lawsuit Ongoing

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

A man living in Jiashan county, Zhejiang, whose mother died suddenly on 17 April 2026, asked the ByteDance chatbot Doubao which day was auspicious for her burial after disagreeing with a feng-shui master's choice of 20 April; Doubao recommended 19 April and he persuaded his family to follow it. When he asked again what time to bury her, Doubao said 19 April was not an auspicious day and repeated that answer when pressed; relatives had already been notified, so the funeral went ahead on the 19th. Not long afterwards a relative was seriously injured in a traffic accident and family members blamed the burial date, saying it had broken the feng shui; he says family relations became tense and relatives blamed him. His complaint to the operator went unanswered, and, with a complaint drafted with Doubao's help, he sued Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology for an apology and damages. Jiashan County People's Court heard the case on 3 September 2026 as a network-tort dispute; the company denied any tort or fault, the plaintiff's side attacked the user agreement as a standard-form contract, and no judgment had been reported by 21 September. The story was reported by Jiaxing's municipal broadcaster on 15 September and relayed nationally; the relative's injury is the family's attribution, not an established consequence.

AI System

Doubao (豆包), ByteDance's consumer chatbot app

Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology Co., Ltd. (Doubao operator; a ByteDance/Douyin subsidiary per Tianyancha as relayed by Sohu and The Paper)

Occurred

17 Apr 2026 to 19 Apr 2026

Reported

15 September 2026

Event location

China

Platform

assistant

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. Doubao's question-and-answer records, shown in the Jiaxing report and described by every relay, recommend 19 April and later state that 19 April is not an auspicious day; the plaintiff also says Doubao drafted his complaint. No inspected report records the operator disputing the chat records; its reported position at the hearing was that there was no tort and no fault in its service.

AI-to-person relation

  • Communicated with the person

Core relations are communication, acting on someone’s behalf, and depiction or impersonation. Decision and claim relations are retained as contextual cases.

Their own AI use. Settings: Everyday life, Relationships, Justice.

Claim status: Reported

After his mother died suddenly on 17 April 2026, the man asked Doubao when she should be buried, having objected to a feng-shui master's choice of 20 April; Doubao's recorded answer recommended 19 April as the safest choice under local custom and the almanac, and he persuaded his family to follow it.

Causal attribution: The plaintiff's account and the chat records shown by the Jiaxing broadcaster.

  • News report (supports): '今年4月17日，他接到家里人的消息，说母亲突发疾病过世'; '当时家里人请了一个风水先生，算出来4月20日是“黄道吉日”'; '软件的问答记录显示，史先生当时提问：“妈妈今天去世，什么时候安葬最合适？”'; '“豆包”回答，按照当地习俗和黄历吉日，最稳妥的推荐是4月19日'; '我就把“豆包”的话说给他们听'; '那么他们就相信了，就照办了'
  • News report (supports): '今年4月17日，史先生母亲去世后，为选择下葬日期，他向豆包询问“黄道吉日”。史先生称，豆包首次回答推荐4月19日'

Claim status: Reported

When he later asked what hour was suitable, Doubao answered 7 to 9 o'clock but said 19 April was not an auspicious day, and repeated that when asked again; relatives had already been notified, so the burial went ahead on 19 April. After a relative was seriously injured in a traffic accident, family members blamed the burial date and him, and family relations became tense.

Causal attribution: The contradictory answers are shown in the chat records; the link between the burial date and the relative's accident is the family's belief, which the reports and the quoted lawyers treat as unsupported.

  • News report (supports): '“豆包”回答7点到9点，不过这次的答案跟上次的答案有点不一样，“豆包”的回答中提到，4月19日不是黄道吉日'; '他又问了好几遍，“豆包”给出的答复是19日不是下葬的“黄道吉日”'; '亲戚朋友已经通知，改日期已经来不及'; '丧事办好不久，家里就有亲戚出交通事故，受伤严重。家里人有怨言，说是母亲安葬日子不对，破坏了风水'; '记者：家里亲戚有怪你的嘛？'; '肯定怪啊，他们说是不是日子被我改了'; '也让家庭关系变得紧张'
  • News report (supports): '等相关事情都安排妥当后，史先生再次询问豆包时，其称19日不是“黄道吉日”，可此时已不便再更改日期'; '家里人对于史先生的安排产生怨言，认为其选择安葬母亲的日子不对，破坏了风水'

Claim status: Corroborated

Doubao's user agreement states that generated content is for reference only and not professional advice, that users should consult professionals on matters of major impact, and that the output should not be the basis for action or inaction; it also contains a clause placing the consequences of acting on outputs on the user.

Causal attribution: Quoted from the agreement by the broadcaster and read in the app by Huashang Daily's reporter.

  • News report (supports): '“豆包”软件和服务生成的内容仅供参考，不作为专业建议。涉及产生重大影响的情形，建议咨询相关专业人士'; '所带来的后果和责任均由用户自行承担'
  • News report (supports): '华商报大风新闻记者看到，豆包App《用户协议》中注明：“本软件及服务生成的内容仅供参考，你不得将输出的内容作为专业建议'; '本软件的输出不应成为你进一步作为或者不作为的依据'; '用户协议中“后果由用户自行承担”等条款属于格式条款'
  • News report (context): '目前，豆包对话界面上方也标注“AI生成可能有误，注意核实”'

Claim status: Reported

His complaint to the operator went unanswered; he sued Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology for an apology and compensation, saying Doubao drafted the complaint; Jiashan County People's Court heard the case on 3 September 2026 as a network-tort liability dispute, the company denied any tort or fault, and no judgment had been reported.

Causal attribution: Hearing date and cause of action per Sohu, per Tianyancha as cited by The Paper, and per Huashang Daily; the parties' positions as relayed from the Jiaxing report.

  • News report (supports): '向“豆包”软件的公司投诉，没有收到回复，于是他决定起诉对方。“豆包”还帮史先生写了一份起诉状'; '这起案件嘉善县人民法院已经开庭审理。庭审中，“豆包”公司一方认为不存在网络侵权行为，软件服务过程中不存在任何过错'; '诉求就是赔礼道歉，赔损失'
  • News report (supports): '该案件已于9月3日在浙江省嘉善县人民法院开庭审理，案由为网络侵权责任纠纷'; '天眼查信息显示，豆包运营主体为北京春田知韵科技有限公司'
  • News report (supports): '9月3日，该案在嘉善县人民法院开庭审理，案由为网络侵权责任纠纷，被告为豆包运营方某公司'; '虽目前尚未宣判'

What remains unknown

  • The date and circumstances of the relative's traffic accident and the relative's identity are not reported; no report connects the accident to the burial date other than the family's belief.
  • The amount of compensation claimed is not disclosed.
  • No judgment or later hearing had been reported by 21 September 2026.
  • Whether the user's complaint reached the operator and why it went unanswered is not reported.
  • The case facts come from one reporting chain (the Jiaxing municipal broadcaster and its relays); the operator has not commented publicly beyond its position at the hearing.
Source reading, translation and location

News report · zh · Source inspected

Read in Chinese on 2026-09-21 (Sina News, published 2026-09-16 03:03, live). Credited to Xinhua Daily; carries the Jiaxing Media Centre 'Xiaoxin Shuoshi' report of 15 September with the interview transcript, the chat records and the lawyer's comment. Translated by the reviewer; the plaintiff's surname is elided from the record.

This source shares an underlying account with another listed source.

News report · zh · Source inspected

Read in Chinese on 2026-09-21 (Huashang Daily 'Dafeng News' legal weekly via Sina, published 2026-09-21 10:34, live). Summarises the case 'according to media reports', reports the 3 September hearing, and its own reporter read the Doubao app's user agreement; adds a lawyer's analysis. Translated by the reviewer.

News report · zh · Source inspected

Read in Chinese on 2026-09-21 (Sohu, published 2026-09-18 21:33, live). Relays the Jiaxing report and adds Tianyancha company details, the 3 September hearing and the May 2026 refund lawsuit. Translated by the reviewer.

This source shares an underlying account with another listed source.

News report · zh · Source inspected

Read in Chinese on 2026-09-21 (Labour Daily relay on Sina Finance, published 2026-09-16 14:21, live). Same Jiaxing account in summary form. Translated by the reviewer.

This source shares an underlying account with another listed source.

News report · zh · Source inspected

Read in Chinese on 2026-09-21 (The Paper, a Pengpai-hao post by China City News, published 2026-09-18 00:15, live). Relays the Jiaxing report, cites Tianyancha for the 3 September hearing and adds a lawyer's comment and the June 2026 Douyin statement on AI answers. Translated by the reviewer.

This source shares an underlying account with another listed source.

News report · en · Source inspected

Read in English on 2026-09-21 from the JSON-LD article body of the saved page (South China Morning Post, published 20 September 2026 10:21, live; a Jimu News relay). Consistent with the Chinese accounts; no case fact rests on it. Context only.

This source shares an underlying account with another listed source.

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

The plaintiff lives in Jiashan county, Zhejiang, and the funeral was in his home town of Shuyang, Jiangsu (Huashang Daily: his mother died in his home town; the Jiaxing broadcaster via Sina gives the home town as Shuyang); the case is before Jiashan County People's Court, Zhejiang (Sohu citing Tianyancha; Huashang Daily).

Reviewed for publication 2026-09-21: Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as a failure of ordinary assistance with a reported adverse experience: a consequential family decision made on a chatbot's contradictory advice, followed by family blame and a lawsuit. Five Chinese bodies and one English relay read in full; the case facts rest on one reporting chain and are recorded as reported; the relative's accident is recorded as the family's attribution, not as a consequence of the AI advice. The plaintiff is identified only by a surname in the reports and is not named here.

What Happened

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.

Reported harm

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.

Relationship DisruptionImpaired Judgment

Outcome

Ongoing

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.

People described

An adult man (the youngest of five siblings; his father is ninety, by his account) from Shuyang, Jiangsu, living in Jiashan county, Zhejiang; identified in Chinese reporting only by a surname, not named here

People reported harmed in this case

1 person

1 AI participant · 0 other people harmed

One person, the Doubao user who made the burial decision and reports family blame and tension (all inspected reports). The injured relative is not counted: the reports give no basis for connecting the traffic accident to the AI advice. Exact 1.

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

Tags

#doubao#bytedance#everyday-assistance#contradictory-answers#funeral#lawsuit#china#zhejiang#jiashan#family-conflict

Cite this case

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

APA

NOPE. (2026). 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. NOPE: AI and people. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-jiashan-zhejiang-doubao-burial-date-lawsuit

BibTeX

@misc{2026_jiashan_zhejiang_doubao_burial_date_lawsuit,
  title = {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},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {NOPE: AI and people},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-jiashan-zhejiang-doubao-burial-date-lawsuit}
}

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