{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-27T06:51:35.375Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"pay","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"2024","response":"lawsuit","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":6,"coverage":{"cases":6,"countries":3,"languages":5,"unknownLocation":3,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":6,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":2,"contextualRelations":2,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":2,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":2},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2024-brasilia-labour-court-orders-ifood-to-compensate-delivery-worker-banned-after-its-face-check-flagged-his-own-photos","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'O aplicativo do iFood exige que, todos os dias, os entregadores enviem uma foto como reconhecimento facial, antes das entregas ou durante o trabalho. O objetivo é evitar fraudes e invasão à conta.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The iFood courier app requires delivery workers to send a photo for facial recognition every day, before deliveries or during work, to prevent fraud and account takeover.","causal_attribution":"Description of the system; no causal claim."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'O caso ocorreu em 30 de abril de 2024' ... 'apareceu a mensagem dizendo que eu estava banido da plataforma por descumprir as normas' ... 'o motivo do banimento foi por conta de que outra pessoa tentou acessar inúmeras vezes o aplicativo e isso é proibido' ... 'era eu na foto'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'Pedi que enviassem a foto de quem estava tentando acessar. E para minha surpresa, a pessoa na foto era eu.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The worker says that on 30 April 2024, after completing the facial check, he received a message that he was banned for breaking the rules; iFood later said another person had repeatedly tried to access the account, and the photo it showed was of him.","causal_attribution":"The worker's account (one witness, interviewed by two outlets); accepted as true by the court by default."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'me tiraram uma renda bem significativa, contava com esse dinheiro toda semana pra pagar minhas contas'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The worker says the ban took away a significant income he relied on every week to pay his bills.","causal_attribution":"The worker's account of the consequence."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'condenou o iFood a pagar R$ 60 mil como indenização por danos morais' ... 'reconheço como verdadeiros: a suspensão do contrato de trabalho por culpa exclusiva da Reclamada; os prejuízos financeiros e psicológicos sofridos pelo Reclamante em razão da impossibilidade de laborar em favor da Reclamada; e a falha racista na ferramenta utilizada para reconhecimento facial' ... 'o iFood não cumpriu o prazo para apresentar a defesa'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'O iFood não apresentou defesa, segundo o magistrado.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"A Brasília labour judge ordered iFood to pay R$60,000 in moral damages, applying a default because iFood did not file a defence in time, and recognised as true the suspension of the contract through iFood's fault, the worker's financial and psychological losses and a racist failure in the facial recognition tool.","causal_attribution":"First-instance judgment as quoted by two outlets (one underlying document); findings rest on a procedural default and are under appeal."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'O iFood afirmou não existe análise de características raciais no procedimento de reconhecimento facial.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'A empresa já apresentou recurso contra a sentença.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"iFood says there is no analysis of racial characteristics in its facial recognition procedure, and it has appealed the judgment.","causal_attribution":"iFood's statement and the appeal; contrary evidence on the racial-bias finding."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'voltou a trabalhar com entrega pelo app'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"iFood restored the account during the case, and the worker returned to delivering through the app.","causal_attribution":"Outcome for the worker before judgment."},{"id":"c7","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Em ambas as fotos está a mesma pessoa: o reclamante (entregador)' ... 'o entregador trabalhava havia três anos para o iFood quando foi bloqueado na plataforma por suposto acesso de outra pessoa na conta'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The worker's lawyer argued that both photos iFood cited show the same person, the worker, and that he had worked for iFood for about three years when he was blocked over the supposed access by another person.","causal_attribution":"The worker's pleading as reported by Estadão."}],"effects":[{"label":"delivery worker banned from the app and lost income after its face check flagged his own photos (worker's account; court ruling by default)","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://g1.globo.com/df/distrito-federal/noticia/2025/06/30/justica-condena-ifood-a-indenizar-entregador-do-df-por-danos-morais-apos-falha-racista-em-reconhecimento-facial-entenda.ghtml","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"pt","translation_note":"Read in Portuguese by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-27 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. G1 report by TV Globo Brasília, read in full.","independence_group":"g1-tvglobo-brasilia"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.estadao.com.br/politica/coluna-do-estadao/justica-condena-ifood-a-indenizar-entregador-por-falha-racista-em-reconhecimento-facial/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"pt","translation_note":"Read in Portuguese by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-27 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Estadão column report, read in full; it gives the court as the 8th Labour Court, where G1 gives the 22nd.","independence_group":"estadao-coluna"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.terra.com.br/nos/ifood-e-condenado-a-indenizar-entregador-por-falha-racista-em-reconhecimento-facial-no-app,8954fd59fdcfb407081f434e12593ba4gonqqml2.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"pt","translation_note":"Read in Portuguese by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-27 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Terra report based on its own interview with the worker, read in full.","independence_group":"terra-nos"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["Whether any person reviewed the facial check result before the ban, or whether the ban was fully automated.","How long the account stayed blocked before iFood restored it.","Which company supplies the facial recognition technology.","Which Brasília labour court heard the case (G1 says the 22nd, Estadão the 8th).","How the appeal ends."],"geography":{"basis":"G1 describes the worker as a delivery worker of the Federal District (DF) and the ban happened while he was making deliveries there, so the event and the affected person are in Brazil; the case was heard by a labour court in Brasília.","court_countries":["BR"],"event_countries":["BR"],"affected_person_countries":["BR"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a contextual case (made_decision_about): a delivery worker says the iFood app's facial recognition check flagged his own photos as another person and the platform banned him, costing income; a Brasília labour court, ruling by default, recognised a racist failure in the facial recognition tool and awarded R$60,000. iFood denies racial analysis and has appealed. No private name appears in the public record.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-27"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The iFood app runs a daily facial recognition check on delivery workers' photos (G1). The worker says that after he completed it the platform banned him, iFood support said another person had tried to access his account, and the photos it showed as that person were his own (Terra, G1); his lawyer's case was that both photos show the same person (Estadão). The labour judge, applying a default because iFood filed no defence, recognised as true a racist failure in the tool used for facial recognition (G1, Estadão). The connection between the system's output and the ban is the worker's account, accepted by default; iFood denies racial analysis but no source reports it disputing the ban sequence. Whether a person reviewed the result before the ban is not stated.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_decision_about"]},"name":"Brasília labour court orders iFood to pay delivery worker who says its face check flagged his own photos as another person and got him banned; iFood appeals","summary":"A delivery worker in Brazil's Federal District who had worked for the iFood app for about three years says he was banned from the platform in April 2024 shortly after completing the app's daily facial recognition check. iFood support told him another person had tried to access his account; when he asked to see that person's photos, they were his own. G1 reports that the only difference from his registration photo was his hair, which he was growing out. In a judgment reported in June 2025, a Brasília labour judge, applying a default because iFood had not filed a defence in time, accepted as true that the contract was suspended through iFood's fault, that he suffered financial and psychological losses, and that the facial recognition tool had a racist failure, and ordered iFood to pay R$60,000 in moral damages. iFood denies that its facial recognition procedure analyses racial characteristics and has appealed. The account was restored during the case. No appeal ruling has been reported.","incidentDate":"2024-04-30","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-06-11","aiSystem":"The facial recognition check in the iFood courier app, which requires delivery workers to submit a photo every day before or during deliveries to prevent fraud and account takeover; the provider of the underlying technology is not named","aiProduct":"iFood facial recognition check","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["financial_loss","professional_harm","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A delivery worker says he was banned from the iFood app after its facial recognition check flagged his own photos as another person and lost income he relied on; a labour court, ruling by default, recognised his financial and psychological losses and awarded R$60,000. iFood denies racial analysis and has appealed.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One delivery worker, the plaintiff. No other affected person is described.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"BR","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_ongoing","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://g1.globo.com/df/distrito-federal/noticia/2025/06/30/justica-condena-ifood-a-indenizar-entregador-do-df-por-danos-morais-apos-falha-racista-em-reconhecimento-facial-entenda.ghtml","primarySourceLabel":"G1 / TV Globo Brasília, 30 Jun 2025: court orders iFood to compensate delivery worker over facial recognition failure (Portuguese)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-27T03:08:51.893173+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-27T03:08:51.893173+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["facial-recognition","identity-verification","gig-work","delivery-workers","account-ban","labour-court","brazil","made-decision-about"]},{"id":"2024-hangzhou-internet-court-rules-skincare-seller-used-ai-face-swap-and-voice-synthesis-to-fake-beauty-bloggers-sales-videos","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'前不久，浙江杭州互联网法院审结了这起AI深度合成肖像权侵权案'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"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."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'通过AI合成技术，批量制作了30多条虚假带货视频'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"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."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'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'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"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."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'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'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"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."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'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'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"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."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'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'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"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."},{"id":"c7","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'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'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"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."}],"effects":[{"label":"likeness and voice synthesised into fake promotional videos without consent; court awarded emotional-distress compensation","claim_id":"c6","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://ipeconomy.cn/mobile/dongtai/11353.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"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.","independence_group":"cctv-news-report-29-sep-2026"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["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."],"geography":{"basis":"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.","court_countries":["CN"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"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.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-26"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"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.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"Hangzhou Internet Court rules a skincare seller used AI face swap and voice synthesis to fake a beauty blogger's sales videos, awarding damages","summary":"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.","incidentDate":"2024-06-01","incidentKind":"ongoing_experience","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-09-29","aiSystem":"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)","aiProduct":"Unidentified face-swap and voice-synthesis tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["exploitation_or_abuse","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"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.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"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.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"CN","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://ipeconomy.cn/mobile/dongtai/11353.html","primarySourceLabel":"ipeconomy.cn (relaying CCTV News), 29 Sep 2026: court rulings on AI face swap","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-26T03:08:11.162341+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-26T03:08:11.162341+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["ai-face-swap","deep-synthesis","voice-synthesis","portrait-rights","livestream-commerce","court-ruling","china","depicted-or-impersonated"]},{"id":"2024-moscow-courts-reinstate-sewing-company-manager-dismissed-after-hours-were-cut-as-employer-introduced-ai","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'В середине 2024 года работодатель начал оптимизацию на предприятии: сократил расходы на производство, внедрил нейротехнологии и искусственный интеллект, уменьшил арендуемые площади.'; 'с июля у нее будет новый график работы — с 09:00 до 11:00, то есть восемь часов в неделю. Зарплату пропорционально уменьшили.'; 'Тогда работодатель уволил ее по пункту 7 части 1 статьи 77 ТК РФ'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The sewing company began cost-cutting in mid-2024 and introduced neural-network and AI technology, and told the manager that from July she would work 09:00 to 11:00, eight hours a week, with pay reduced in proportion; she refused and was dismissed for refusing to continue work after changes to her contract terms.","causal_attribution":"The article's account of the facts as the rulings record them."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'недавно начали внедрять на предприятии искусственный интеллект'; 'Многие задачи, которые раньше выполняли люди вручную, теперь делают программы.'; 'Перед увольнением она крайне плохо работала'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The employer said that since it began introducing AI many tasks previously done manually were done by programs, so the manager's full-time work was no longer needed; it also said she had worked badly.","causal_attribution":"The employer's position in court."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Мою должность планировали исключить из штатного расписания, а часть функций заменить программами и искусственным интеллектом.'; 'Из-за незаконного увольнения я осталась без денег, испытала стресс и переживания.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The manager said the change was a disguised redundancy, that her post was to be cut and part of its functions replaced by programs and AI, and that the dismissal left her without money and caused her stress.","causal_attribution":"The manager's position in court."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Дело № 2-1354/2025'; 'Работодатель и правда сокращал расходы на предприятии — это подтвердили в суде другие сотрудники. А работу менеджера планировали полностью заменить нейросетями.'; 'работодатель должен восстановить истицу на работе'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The district court (case 2-1354/2025) found that other employees confirmed the cost-cutting and that the manager's work was planned to be fully replaced by neural networks, held that refusal of part-time work had to be handled as a redundancy, and ordered reinstatement, back pay and moral damages.","causal_attribution":"The district court's findings as the article reports them; the ruling was not read."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Дело № 33-34099/2025'; 'Поэтому суд первой инстанции правильно признал приказ об увольнении незаконным и обязал работодателя восстановить сотрудницу на работе.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Moscow City Court (case 33-34099/2025) upheld the reinstatement and corrected the back-pay calculation.","causal_attribution":"The appellate outcome as the article reports it."},{"id":"c6","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Завершено, 24.07.2025'; 'О восстановлении на работе в связи с увольнением по инициативе работодателя'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Moscow City Court's case portal lists civil appeal 33-34099/2025, in the category of reinstatement after dismissal at the employer's initiative, as concluded on 24 July 2025.","causal_attribution":"Court record of the appeal's existence, category and completion date; it says nothing about AI."}],"effects":[{"label":"hours and pay cut to two hours a day as the employer introduced AI, then dismissed on refusing; later reinstated by the courts","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://t-j.ru/ai-ai-ai/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ru","translation_note":"Read in Russian on 2026-10-25 (full article by a lawyer, summarising the employee's and employer's positions and both rulings, with case numbers). Translation by the research agent, an AI.","independence_group":"t-zhurnal-ruling-account"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://mos-gorsud.ru/search?formType=fullForm&caseNumber=33-34099%2F2025","kind":"court_case_portal","access":"read","language":"ru","translation_note":"Read in Russian on 2026-10-25: the search-result entry for appeal 33-34099/2025 (status, date and case category). The case card and the rulings were not read. Translation by the research agent, an AI.","independence_group":"moscow-city-court-portal"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["The dismissal date (after the July 2024 schedule change).","Which AI tools the company introduced and what they did.","The amounts of back pay and damages.","Whether the company later made her redundant lawfully."],"geography":{"basis":"The article describes her as a Moscow resident dismissed under article 77 of the Russian Labour Code, and the cases were heard by a Moscow district court and the Moscow City Court; the employer’s own location is not stated.","court_countries":["RU"],"event_countries":["RU"],"affected_person_countries":["RU"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a consequential response to AI adoption: according to the article's account of the rulings, the employer cut a manager to two hours a day while introducing AI to take over her work and dismissed her when she refused, and two courts ordered her reinstatement. The appeal's existence, category and completion date are confirmed by the court portal.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-25"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The harm is the employer's response to its own adoption of AI: according to T-Zhurnal's account of the rulings, the company introduced neural-network and AI technology in 2024, said programs now did many of the manager's tasks, cut her to two hours a day and dismissed her when she refused; the district court found that her work was planned to be fully replaced by neural networks. No source describes an AI system's output toward her, and no system is named.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Moscow: courts reinstate a sewing-company manager dismissed after refusing two-hour days that her employer tied to introducing AI, T-Zhurnal reports","summary":"T-Zhurnal (T-Bank's magazine) reported on 16 September 2026, in a lawyer's account of two court decisions, that the sewing company employing a Moscow resident as a full-time manager began cost-cutting in mid-2024 and introduced neural-network and AI technology, and told her that from July she would work 09:00 to 11:00, eight hours a week, with pay reduced in proportion. She refused and was dismissed for refusing to continue work after changes to her contract terms. The employer said that since it began introducing AI many of the manager's tasks were done by programs and full-time work was no longer needed, and that she had worked badly; she said the change was a disguised redundancy and that her post was to be cut and partly replaced by programs and AI. According to the article, the district court (case 2-1354/2025) found that other employees confirmed the cost-cutting and that the manager's work was planned to be fully replaced by neural networks, held that the refusal of part-time work had to be treated as a redundancy, and ordered her reinstatement with back pay and moral damages. The Moscow City Court (case 33-34099/2025) upheld the reinstatement and reduced the back-pay calculation; the court's case portal lists that appeal as concluded on 24 July 2025. The amounts are not given.","incidentDate":"2024-01-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-09-16","aiSystem":"Neural-network and AI technology that the employer said it introduced in 2024 and that, per the article, was planned to take over the manager's work; no system is named","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI tools","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm","financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to T-Zhurnal's account of the rulings, the manager's hours and pay were cut to two hours a day as the employer introduced AI, and she was dismissed when she refused; she said the dismissal left her without money and caused her stress. The courts ordered her reinstatement with back pay and moral damages.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One manager dismissed and reinstated; she did not use the AI tools herself (employer's adoption).","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"RU","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://t-j.ru/ai-ai-ai/","primarySourceLabel":"T-Zhurnal, Было дело: как компания заменила женщину нейросетью, 16 September 2026","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-25T03:12:44.024601+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-25T03:12:44.024601+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["ai-replacement","dismissal","reinstatement","reduced-hours","labour-court","moscow"]},{"id":"2024-gelderland-sub-district-judge-used-chatgpt-to-estimate-solar-panel-damages-in-neighbour-dispute-and-rejected-claim","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Volgens hem is de verminderde opbrengst van de panelen van 77%'; 'Dat leidt volgens hem tot een totale schade van € 21.385,90'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The claimant sued his neighbour for about 21,000 euros, saying the neighbour's roof extension cut the yield of his solar panels by 77%.","causal_attribution":"The claimant's case as recorded in the judgment; documented as the content of his claim, not as a fact about the yield."},{"id":"c2","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'De kantonrechter schat, mede met behulp van ChatGPT, de gemiddelde levensduur van zonnepanelen uit 2009 op 25 à 30 jaar'; 'Uitgaande, wederom mede aan de hand van ChatGPT, van een huidige gemiddelde kWh-prijs van € 0,30'; 'bedraagt het rendementsverlies, met een min of meer gelijkblijvende kWh-prijs, daarmee ongeveer € 2.250,--'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Bij de schadeberekening maakt de rechtbank ook gebruik van ChatGPT'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The judge estimated the panels' remaining lifespan and the average electricity price partly with the help of ChatGPT and put the yield loss at about 2,250 euros.","causal_attribution":"Stated by the court in its own judgment; the summary relays it. One origin (the judgment)."},{"id":"c3","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'het maximaal te begroten bedrag aan schade zou hiermee (€ 2.250,-- + € 1.073,40 =) € 3.323,40 bedragen'; 'uiteindelijk aangeboden bedrag van'; 'Er is dus in deze procedure geen grond om'; 'heeft ook geen recht op € 3.300,-, nu hij het aanbod tot het betalen van dit bedrag heeft verworpen'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Rechtbank Gelderland oordeelt dat X geen recht heeft op een schadevergoeding in verband met de door Y geplaatste dakopbouw'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Because half of the maximum damage of 3,323.40 euros was below the neighbour's 3,300-euro offer, which the claimant had refused, the claim was rejected and he received nothing.","causal_attribution":"The court's reasoning linking the ChatGPT-assisted estimate to the rejection; documented by the judgment."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Redelijkerwijs – en ook weer mede aan de hand van ChatGPT – valt aan te nemen dat dit materiaal daardoor niet meer bruikbaar was'; 'wegens schadevergoeding te betalen'; '€ 2.619,02, vermeerderd met de wettelijke rente'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The judge also assumed, partly with ChatGPT, that insulation the claimant threw into water was unusable, and on the counterclaim ordered him to pay damages of 2,619.02 euros in total and the costs of the main claim.","causal_attribution":"Stated in the judgment; the ChatGPT-assisted assumption supports only the 204.66-euro insulation item within the total."}],"effects":[{"label":"damages claim rejected after a ChatGPT-assisted damage estimate","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://data.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraken/content?id=ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2024:3636","kind":"court_record","access":"read","language":"nl","translation_note":"Read in Dutch by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-24 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Full text of the judgment of 7 June 2024 from the Rechtspraak open-data service (published 26 July 2024); HTTP 200, read in full.","independence_group":"rechtbank-gelderland-judgment-2024-3636"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.taxlive.nl/nl/documenten/vn-vandaag/rechter-gebruikt-chatgpt-bij-schadeberekening/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"nl","translation_note":"Read in Dutch by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-24 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Taxlive V-N Vandaag summary of the same judgment, edition 12 August 2024; HTTP 200, read in full.","independence_group":"rechtbank-gelderland-judgment-2024-3636"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["justice","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["What the judge asked ChatGPT and what it answered.","Whether the claimant appealed and with what result.","How the outcome would have differed without the ChatGPT-assisted estimates; the judgment also rejected the investment claim on other grounds."],"geography":{"basis":"The dispute concerns two attached houses whose owners also live in them, decided by the Rechtbank Gelderland sitting in Nijmegen; the street and town are anonymised in the published judgment, which applies Dutch law and Dutch subsidies.","court_countries":["NL"],"event_countries":["NL"],"affected_person_countries":["NL"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as an AI-informed decision: in a judgment of 7 June 2024 a Dutch sub-district judge stated that the estimates of a homeowner's solar-panel lifespan and electricity prices were made partly with ChatGPT, and the resulting damage figure led to the rejection of the homeowner's claim against his neighbour. The facts come from the judgment itself.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-24"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The judgment states that the judge estimated the lifespan of the claimant's solar panels and the current electricity price partly with the help of ChatGPT, and those figures set the yield loss at about 2,250 euros and the maximum damage below the level at which the neighbour's offer would have been insufficient, leading to the rejection of the claim; the judge also relied partly on ChatGPT to treat insulation material as unusable in the counterclaim. The judgment does not reproduce the questions or answers.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["informed_decision_about"]},"name":"Dutch sub-district judge used ChatGPT to estimate solar-panel lifespan and power prices in a neighbour dispute, then rejected the homeowner's damages claim","summary":"A homeowner in the Netherlands sued his neighbour, whose permitted roof extension shaded his solar panels, claiming more than 21,000 euros for lost yield and investment. In a judgment of 7 June 2024 (ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2024:3636), the sub-district judge of the Rechtbank Gelderland, sitting in Nijmegen, held that the neighbour had to bear half of the damage and then calculated the damage, estimating the average lifespan of solar panels from 2009 and the current average electricity price partly with the help of ChatGPT, as the judgment states. Using a lifespan of 27.5 years, about 15 remaining years and a price of 0.30 euros per kWh, the judge put the yield loss at about 2,250 euros and the maximum damage at 3,323.40 euros; half of that was less than the 3,300 euros the neighbour had offered, so the claim was rejected and the homeowner, who had refused the offer, received nothing and was ordered to pay costs. On the neighbour's counterclaim, the judge assumed, again partly with ChatGPT, that insulation material the homeowner had thrown into water was no longer usable, and ordered him to pay damages of 2,619.02 euros in total. The judgment does not say what was asked or answered, and whether it was appealed is not reported.","incidentDate":"2024-06-07","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2024-07-26","aiSystem":"ChatGPT, which the judgment says was used, together with other reasoning, to estimate the lifespan of solar panels, the average electricity price and whether water-damaged insulation was still usable","aiProduct":"ChatGPT","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"verified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm","financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A homeowner's damages claim was rejected after the judge calculated the damage partly with ChatGPT's estimates, and the homeowner was ordered to pay costs and counterclaim damages, according to the judgment.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"The claimant homeowner, whose claim was rejected in the judgment. The neighbour won the counterclaim and is not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"NL","platformType":"chatbot","outcomeType":"lawsuit_dismissed","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://data.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraken/content?id=ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2024:3636","primarySourceLabel":"Rechtbank Gelderland, judgment of 7 June 2024, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2024:3636 (Rechtspraak open data)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-24T03:15:10.77655+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-24T03:15:10.77655+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["court","judge-ai-use","chatgpt","damages","netherlands"]},{"id":"2024-beijing-court-rules-insurer-unlawfully-dismissed-legal-officer-over-ai-platform-upload","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'在某保险公司担任法务，负责合规稽查、风险核查等工作。2024年7月，为优化工作流程、提升PPT制作及数据分析效率'; '在公司领导推荐下，将自行整理加工后的公司稽核问题数据表，上传至第三方AI平台用于辅助办公'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'2024年7月，为优化工作流程、提升PPT制作及数据分析效率，她在公司领导推荐下，将自行整理加工后的公司稽核问题数据表上传至第三方AI平台辅助办公'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"A legal officer at an insurance company, responsible for compliance audits and risk checks, uploaded a company audit-issues data table she had compiled and processed to a third-party AI platform in July 2024, to help make presentations and analyse data, on the recommendation of company leadership.","causal_attribution":"The court's account as relayed by two outlets that share it as their source."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'2024年8月，公司却突然向'; '出具《解除劳动合同告知书》'; '“严重违反规章制度”为由，单方解除了双方劳动关系'; '其将公司稽核类内部文件上传至第三方AI平台，平台会收集、留存用户数据用于模型迭代，存在信息泄露、被第三方窃取的重大风险'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'一个月后，公司向她出具《解除劳动合同告知书》，理由是'; '“严重违反规章制度”'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"In August 2024 the company served a notice terminating her labour contract for serious violation of its rules, arguing that as a compliance employee bound by a confidentiality agreement she had uploaded internal audit files to a platform that collects and retains user data for model iteration, creating a risk of leakage.","causal_attribution":"The company's stated reason for the dismissal, as recounted in the court's account; the dismissal responded to the employee's use of the AI platform."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'认为，自己没有泄密的主观故意，使用AI工具是为了提高工作效率，上传至AI的数据表已经过整理加工，并非公司核心保密信息，属于合规办公，此次操作也并未造成公司信息外泄或经济损失等现实后果'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The employee said she had no intent to disclose secrets, that the uploaded table had been processed and was not core confidential information, and that no leak or economic loss resulted.","causal_attribution":"The employee's position as recounted in the court's account."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'朝阳法院审理认为'; '不存在违反规章制度的主观故意'; '所有内部规章制度均未明确禁止员工使用第三方AI工具辅助办公'; '公司未针对AI工具使用开展任何专项培训'; '公司仅以AI平台存在数据留存的通用规则，推定存在泄密风险，不足以认定员工行为构成“严重违反规章制度”'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'法院还指出，公司未能举证证明'; '上传的文件属于法定或制度界定的核心保密信息，也无法证实该行为造成了信息外泄、经济损失或声誉受损等实际后果'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Chaoyang District People's Court found that she had no intent to breach the rules, that none of the company's rules expressly prohibited third-party AI tools, that the company had given no training on them, and that the platform's general data-retention rules did not establish a serious violation.","causal_attribution":"The court's reasoning as relayed by the press; the judgment text was not inspected."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'依法判决撤销其向'; '作出的《解除劳动合同告知书》，双方继续履行劳动合同，同时判令保险公司向'; '支付因违法解约产生的年终奖差额、绩效工资、工资损失等。目前，该判决已经生效'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'一审认定保险公司单方解除行为违法，判决撤销解除告知书、双方继续履行劳动合同，并判令公司支付年终奖差额、绩效工资及工资损失，目前判决已生效'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'法院一审认定，公司单方解除行为违法，判决撤销解除通知、双方继续履行合同，并补发年终奖差额、绩效工资及工资损失。判决已生效'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The court ruled at first instance that the dismissal was unlawful, revoked the termination notice, ordered the labour contract to continue and ordered the insurer to pay the year-end bonus shortfall, performance pay and lost wages; the judgment has taken effect.","causal_attribution":"Reports of the judgment that all derive from the court's disclosure, so the claim stays reported."}],"effects":[{"label":"employee dismissed by her employer for uploading a work data table to a third-party AI platform","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"},{"label":"employee lost year-end bonus, performance pay and wages through the dismissal, which a court ordered the insurer to make good","claim_id":"c5","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://xinwen.bjd.com.cn/content/s6acee3f7e4b0e42f8f0189ec.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese in full. Quotations and their English renderings in this record were translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed them. Beijing Daily's own report (reporter credited) of the Chaoyang court's account of the case.","independence_group":"chaoyang-court-account-oct-2026"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://news.mydrivers.com/1/1157/1157186.htm","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese in full. Quotations and their English renderings in this record were translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed them. Kuai Keji relays the case from China National Radio (Voice of China); the court is the underlying source, so it shares an independence group with Beijing Daily.","independence_group":"chaoyang-court-account-oct-2026"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.mrjjxw.com/articles/2026-10-14/4604034.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese in full. Quotations and their English renderings in this record were translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed them. A signed commentary in National Business Daily that summarises the court's disclosure of the case; it adds no independent reporting.","independence_group":"chaoyang-court-account-oct-2026"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["The name of the insurer and of the AI platform.","The date of the judgment and the amounts ordered.","Whether the employee returned to work after the ruling.","Whether the platform retained or used the uploaded table."],"geography":{"basis":"The ruling was given by the Chaoyang District People's Court in Beijing. No source states where the insurer or the employee was located, so the event and affected-person countries are left unrecorded rather than inferred from the court's seat.","court_countries":["CN"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as an employer's dismissal of a named-role employee for her own use of a third-party AI platform, followed by a court ruling, now effective, that the dismissal was unlawful. The facts are the court's account as reported by the press; the judgment itself was not read.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-15"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The harm is the employer's response to the employee's own use of AI. In the court's account relayed by Beijing Daily and Kuai Keji, she uploaded a compiled company audit data table to a third-party AI platform to help with presentations and data analysis, and the company's termination notice treated that upload, and the platform's retention of user data for model iteration, as a serious breach of its rules. No source says the AI platform produced any output about the employee or that any output reached the decision, so the relation is unknown under the consequential-response exemption.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Beijing court rules an insurer unlawfully dismissed a legal officer for uploading an internal audit table to a third-party AI platform","summary":"A legal officer at an insurance company, responsible for compliance audits and risk checks, uploaded a company audit-issues data table that she had compiled and processed to a third-party AI platform in July 2024, to help make presentations and analyse data. According to the court's account, she did so on the recommendation of company leadership. In August 2024 the company served her a notice terminating her labour contract for serious violation of its rules, arguing that as a compliance employee bound by a confidentiality agreement she had exposed internal audit material to a platform that collects and retains user data for model iteration. The Chaoyang District People's Court in Beijing ruled at first instance that the dismissal was unlawful: the company's rules did not prohibit third-party AI tools, it had given no training on their use, and it had not shown that the table was core confidential information or that any leak or loss occurred. The court revoked the termination notice, ordered the contract to continue and ordered the company to pay the employee's year-end bonus shortfall, performance pay and lost wages. Kuai Keji, citing China National Radio, reported the ruling on 13 October 2026 and Beijing Daily on 14 October; both say the judgment has taken effect. No source names the insurer or the AI platform.","incidentDate":"2024-08-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-10-13","aiSystem":"A third-party AI platform, not named in any source, to which the employee uploaded a compiled company audit-issues data table to help make presentations and analyse data","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI presentation and data-analysis tool","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm","financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The employee lost her job in August 2024 over her upload of a work data table to a third-party AI platform; the Chaoyang court later ruled the dismissal unlawful and ordered the insurer to pay the year-end bonus shortfall, performance pay and wage losses arising from it (court's account as reported by Beijing Daily and Kuai Keji). Whether the sums have been paid is not reported.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One employee: the claimant in the reported labour dispute, who used the AI platform herself.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"CN","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://xinwen.bjd.com.cn/content/s6acee3f7e4b0e42f8f0189ec.html","primarySourceLabel":"Beijing Daily, 14 October 2026: 用外部AI处理内部文件遭公司辞退？法院判决：企业违法！","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-15T03:00:01.598786+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-15T03:00:01.598786+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["dismissal","workplace-ai","labour-dispute","reinstatement","insurance","consequential-response"]},{"id":"2025-tsuda-v-tiktok-ai-voice-imitation-tokyo","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'生成AI（人工知能）によって自身の声を無断で模倣した動画が公開されているとして、人気声優の津田健次郎さんが、TikTok（ティックトック）の運営会社に動画の削除を求めて東京地裁に提訴していたことが23日分かった。'; '2024年7月〜25年9月、津田さんの声質を模したナレーションを付け、都市伝説やオカルト、雑学をテーマとした動画を188本投稿したとされる。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'訴状などによると、２０２４年７月～２５年９月、都市伝説や陰謀論を扱う画像に津田さんの声質を模したナレーションを付けた動画１８８件が投稿された。'; '動画には「ツダケンの声がする」「声が似ている」などのコメントが相次いだ。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'訴状によると、問題の動画アカウントは2024年7月以降、津田さんの声を模したナレーションで都市伝説や心霊現象を語る内容で、少なくとも188件投稿した。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"According to Mr Tsuda's complaint, an account run by an unidentified person posted at least 188 videos between July 2024 and September 2025 narrated by a generative-AI imitation of his voice, without his permission, and viewers commented that the voice sounded like him.","causal_attribution":"Plaintiff's allegations as reported from the complaint and his lawyer (one chain); the court has not ruled."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'ティックトックには再生回数に応じて金銭が支払われる仕組みがあり、月50万〜75万円の収益を上げたとしている。'; '提訴は25年11月。この時点で投稿者は21万人以上のフォロワーを有し、動画の平均再生回数は147万回に上るという。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'動画の再生数に応じて投稿者は月50万～75万円の収益を上げていた、と津田さん側は主張している。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"His side says the account had about 210,000 followers when he sued in November 2025, videos averaged 1.47 million views, and the poster earned 500,000 to 750,000 yen a month from TikTok's view-based payments.","causal_attribution":"Plaintiff's figures; not independently verified."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'これに対して運営会社側は「投稿者は『友人の声を生成ＡＩに学習させた』と述べており、普遍的な男性の声にすぎない」などと反論。提訴後に動画データがアカウントごと削除されたとし、「訴えの利益はない」として請求却下も求めている。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'一方、ティックトック側は答弁書で、問題の音声が「津田さんと『同一の声』かどうかは客観的に明らかではない」などと反論。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'25年8月、東京地裁がティックトック側に投稿者の情報の開示を命じたが、開示された情報が古く、投稿者の特定に至らなかったという。'","relation":"context","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"TikTok's operator disputes the claim, saying it is not objectively clear the voice is the same as his and that it is a generic male voice, that the poster said they had trained AI on a friend's voice, and that the account and videos were deleted after the suit was filed; it asks for the claim to be dismissed.","causal_attribution":"Defendant's position as reported."},{"id":"c4","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'高橋裁判長は判決理由で、一般論として人の声は「肖像と同様に個人の人格の象徴と言える」と指摘。実演家の声を無断で使用する行為は、もっぱらその声がもつ顧客吸引力の利用が目的と認められる場合にはパブリシティー権の侵害に当たるとの考え方を示した。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"'判決は、人の声は容姿と同じように「個人の人格の象徴といえる」と指摘。'; '人の声が法的な保護の対象になると認めた司法判断は初めて。'; '声優らの声を無断で使う行為について、その声に商品の販売などを促す顧客吸引力があり、もっぱらその声の顧客吸引力を利用する目的で使っている場合は「パブリシティー権の侵害にあたると解するのが相当だ」と述べた。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"},{"locator":"'30日の判決で東京地裁は「人の声は肖像と同様に個人の人格の象徴」と指摘しました。'; 'そのうえで実演家の声を無断で使用することについて、顧客吸引力の利用する目的があれば「パブリシティー権」の侵害に当たるとする初めての判断を示しました。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s7"},{"locator":"'模倣された声が入った動画の削除を求めた訴訟の判決が３０日、東京地裁で言い渡される。生成ＡＩによる声の権利侵害を巡る初の訴訟で'","relation":"context","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'ベテラン声優らは「声の権利を認めてほしい」と訴え、津田健次郎さんが起こした訴訟の判決を見守っている。'","relation":"context","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"On 30 September 2026 the Tokyo District Court held, as a general principle, that a person's voice is a symbol of individual personality like a likeness, and that using a performer's voice without permission solely to exploit its power to attract customers infringes the right of publicity; it was described as the first such judicial finding in Japan.","causal_attribution":"Court's general holding as reported by three outlets that each reported the judgment; the judgment text itself was not read."},{"id":"c5","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'ただ今回の動画はすでに運営会社のサーバーからも削除されているとし、これ以上削除する義務を負っておらず原告の請求は理由がないと結論付けた。問題の動画がパブリシティー権を侵害しているかは判断を示さなかった。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"'一方で判決は、今回の裁判で津田さん側が問題とした動画は削除済みだと認定。津田さんの声の権利が侵害されたかについては判断しなかった。'; 'ただ、今回の事例では動画がすでに消えており、ティックトックの運営会社に削除義務はないと判断。津田さん側の請求は退けた。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"},{"locator":"'一方で、動画の削除についてはアカウントがすでに削除されているため、削除義務がないとし、津田さん側の請求を退けました。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s7"}],"assertion":"The court dismissed Mr Tsuda's claim because the videos had already been deleted, so TikTok's operator had no duty to delete them, and it did not decide whether the videos infringed his publicity right.","causal_attribution":"Court's disposition as reported; no finding that the videos imitate or infringe his voice."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'原告側は津田さんの声と混同させて月50万〜75万円の収益を得ていたなどとして、不正競争防止法違反にも当たると主張したが、この点については判決は言及しなかった。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"According to Nikkei, the judgment did not address his separate argument that the videos breached the Unfair Competition Prevention Act by passing them off as his voice.","causal_attribution":"Single report (Nikkei)."},{"id":"c7","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'今年5月には投稿者がアカウントを削除した。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"'提訴後の今年5月、投稿者がアカウントを削除し、問題の動画は表示されなくなっていた。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"}],"assertion":"The poster deleted the account in May 2026, after the suit was filed.","causal_attribution":"Reported by Nikkei and the Asahi Shimbun from the proceedings."},{"id":"c8","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'判決後、津田さんの代理人弁護士は控訴しない方針を示した。'; 'ティックトックの運営会社は「今後も、テクノロジーの発展と権利保護のバランスのとれた在り方について、誠実に取り組んでいく」とコメントした。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"}],"assertion":"After the judgment his lawyer said they did not plan to appeal, and TikTok's operator said it would keep working on a balance between technological development and rights protection.","causal_attribution":"Statements reported by the Asahi Shimbun."}],"effects":[{"label":"voice allegedly imitated by generative AI without permission in at least 188 monetised TikTok videos that viewers associated with him","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.jiji.com/jc/article?k=2026092600287&g=soc","kind":"wire_report","access":"read","language":"ja","translation_note":"Read live in Japanese on 2026-09-28; summarised in English by the researcher (no human translation). Reports the complaint and TikTok's filings. Re-read on 2026-10-01.","independence_group":"tsuda-complaint"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXZQOUD231K30T20C26A5000000/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ja","translation_note":"Read live in Japanese on 2026-09-28 (23 May 2026); sourced to the plaintiff's lawyer and the complaint. Researcher translation. Re-read on 2026-10-01.","independence_group":"tsuda-complaint"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASV5T2J1LV5TUTIL00FM.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ja","translation_note":"Read live in Japanese on 2026-09-28 (May 2026); the visible article text was read and quotes the complaint and TikTok's answer. Researcher translation. Re-read on 2026-10-01.","independence_group":"tsuda-complaint"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.jiji.com/jc/article?k=2026092600297&g=soc","kind":"wire_report","access":"read","language":"ja","translation_note":"Read live in Japanese on 2026-09-28 (26 September 2026). Industry context; does not add facts about the Tsuda videos. Researcher translation. Re-read on 2026-10-01.","independence_group":"jiji-industry-feature"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXZQOUD262B00W6A920C2000000/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ja","translation_note":"Read live in Japanese on 2026-10-01 (30 September 2026 judgment report by Nikkei; photo credited to Kyodo). Researcher translation.","independence_group":"nikkei-judgment-report"},{"id":"s6","url":"https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASV9Z11V1V9ZUTIL02SM.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ja","translation_note":"Read live in Japanese on 2026-10-01; the visible text before the paywall was read (about 1,000 characters remain unread). Bylined by the Asahi Tokyo city news court reporter. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"asahi-judgment-report"},{"id":"s7","url":"https://news.tv-asahi.co.jp/news_society/articles/900200797.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ja","translation_note":"Read live in Japanese on 2026-10-01 (TV Asahi running summary of the 30 September 2026 judgment). Researcher translation.","independence_group":"tv-asahi-judgment-report"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["Who ran the account and which AI tool produced the voice (a court-ordered disclosure in August 2025 did not identify the poster, according to the Asahi Shimbun).","Whether the voice was modelled on Mr Tsuda's voice and whether the videos infringed his publicity right; the court dismissed the claim because the videos had already been deleted, without deciding either.","Mr Tsuda's own account of personal or financial effects; no statement from him was read.","The full judgment text; it was not read, and the court's reasoning is taken from news reports."],"geography":{"basis":"Mr Tsuda is a Japanese voice actor working in Japan and the suit is in the Tokyo District Court (Nikkei; Jiji). The poster is unidentified and the place where the videos were made is not reported, so no event country is recorded.","court_countries":["JP"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["JP"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as a core case (a generative-AI voice alleged to impersonate a real, named performer in monetised videos). Updated after the 30 September 2026 judgment: the facts of the videos come from his complaint as reported by Nikkei, the Asahi Shimbun and Jiji Press, with TikTok's rebuttal; the ruling is taken from Nikkei, Asahi and TV Asahi reports. Imitation and infringement remain undecided because the court dismissed the claim on the ground that the videos had already been deleted. Mr Tsuda is a public figure suing in his own name; the poster is unidentified.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-01"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The complaint alleges generative-AI imitation of his voice (Nikkei; Asahi; Jiji). TikTok's side and the poster reportedly say the voice was generated by AI trained on a friend's voice, so AI generation is asserted by both sides; whether it imitates Tsuda was not decided by the court, which dismissed the claim because the videos had been deleted.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"Tokyo: voice actor Kenjiro Tsuda sued TikTok's operator over at least 188 monetised videos he says were narrated by a generative-AI imitation of his voice; on 30 September 2026 the Tokyo District Court held that a voice can be protected by publicity rights but dismissed his deletion claim because the videos had already been deleted","summary":"Kenjiro Tsuda, a Japanese voice actor known for roles in Jujutsu Kaisen, sued the operator of TikTok in the Tokyo District Court in November 2025, seeking removal of videos he says use a generative-AI imitation of his voice without permission. According to his complaint, as reported by Jiji Press, Nikkei and the Asahi Shimbun, an account run by an unidentified person posted at least 188 short videos on urban legends, the occult and trivia between July 2024 and September 2025, narrated in a voice modelled on his; the account had about 210,000 followers, videos averaged 1.47 million views, and his side says the poster earned 500,000 to 750,000 yen a month from TikTok's view-based payments. TikTok's operator said the voice was a generic male voice that the poster said came from AI trained on a friend's voice. The poster deleted the account in May 2026. On 30 September 2026 the court held, as a general principle, that a person's voice is a symbol of personality like a likeness and that using a performer's voice without permission solely to exploit its power to attract customers infringes the right of publicity, the first such ruling in Japan. It dismissed the claim because the videos were already gone and TikTok's operator had no remaining duty to delete them, and it did not decide whether these videos infringed his rights (Nikkei; Asahi Shimbun; TV Asahi). His lawyer said they did not plan to appeal.","incidentDate":"2024-07-01","incidentEndDate":"2025-09-30","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-05-23","aiSystem":"An unidentified generative-AI voice tool used by an anonymous TikTok account to produce narration (the plaintiff alleges the voice imitates his; the poster reportedly said the model was trained on a friend's voice); videos distributed on TikTok","aiProduct":"Unidentified voice-cloning tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["exploitation_or_abuse"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Mr Tsuda alleges that an anonymous poster used a generative-AI imitation of his voice, without permission, to narrate at least 188 monetised TikTok videos that viewers took to be his, infringing his rights over his voice; TikTok disputes that the voice is his, and the court dismissed his deletion claim without deciding infringement because the videos had been deleted (Nikkei, Asahi and Jiji Press).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"disputed","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person, the plaintiff Kenjiro Tsuda, whose voice is alleged to have been imitated (Nikkei; Asahi; Jiji Press). Followers and viewers are not counted. Other voice actors described in the Jiji industry feature are separate accounts and are not counted. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"JP","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_dismissed","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXZQOUD262B00W6A920C2000000/","primarySourceLabel":"Nikkei, 30 September 2026: 声にもパブリシティー権、初の司法判断　津田健次郎さんの請求は棄却","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-28T03:31:37.82387+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-10T03:20:05.706932+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["voice-cloning","voice-actor","publicity-rights","tiktok","japan","tokyo-district-court","lawsuit","depicted-or-impersonated","court-ruling"]}]}