In a Tokyo courtroom, a question as old as identity itself was given a modern answer: a human voice, shaped by years of craft and care, belongs to the person who made it. Judge Aya Takahashi ruled in favor of actor Kenjiro Tsuda, whose distinctive baritone had been cloned by an anonymous TikTok account to narrate occult videos for hundreds of thousands of subscribers. The verdict marks the first time a Japanese court has extended publicity rights to the voice, placing it alongside the face and name as a protected expression of personhood. In doing so, it draws a line between technological poss
Tokyo court grants voice actors legal protection against AI cloning in landmark ruling
A voice is as symbolic of one's personality as portraits are
Mark
So the court said voices are protected now. Does that mean every time someone uses an AI voice that sounds like someone else, it's automatically illegal?
Mimi
Not quite. The judge was specific: the protection kicks in when someone uses a voice "exclusively to take advantage of its commercial appeal." So it has to be deliberate, and it has to be for profit.
Mark
But how do you prove that? How do you prove an AI voice is actually a copy of someone's voice and not just a generic male voice that happens to sound similar?
Mimi
That's the hard part, and honestly, the court didn't fully solve it. In Tsuda's case, he had evidence—the account's profile picture was his anime character, the content was designed to attract his fans, the account made real money. All of that together made the case.
Luke
But TikTok's argument wasn't unreasonable. They said it was a generic voice. The judge decided it wasn't, but she didn't explain the technical method for distinguishing a cloned voice from a generated one. That's a gap.
Mimi
True. And the account deleted the videos before the ruling came down, so we don't have a case where the court actually ordered removal. Tsuda won the principle but not the remedy.
Mark
What does this mean for voice actors in Japan? Are they suddenly protected?
Mimi
They have a legal framework now. If someone clones their voice and uses it commercially without permission, they can sue and potentially win. But it's not automatic. You'd still have to prove it in court.
Luke
And the precedent only applies in Japan. TikTok operates globally. A voice actor in another country doesn't have this protection yet.
Mark
So this is really about Japan establishing a principle that other countries might follow?
Mimi
Exactly. It's the first ruling of its kind anywhere. Other countries are watching to see how this plays out.
Luke
The other thing worth noting: we don't know how much money Tsuda actually lost. The complaint estimated the account earned between ¥500,000 and ¥75,000 monthly, but those are rough figures. We don't know if Tsuda could have monetized that audience himself, or if he suffered any actual damages beyond the principle.
Mark
So the ruling is more symbolic than practical?
Mimi
It's both. Symbolically, it's huge—it says voices are protected. Practically, it establishes a legal path for voice actors to defend themselves. But you're right that the details still need to be worked out.
The Pulse
- For over a year, an anonymous account built a 200,000-subscriber audience by deploying what appeared to be a stolen voice — the unmistakable baritone of one of Japan's most celebrated anime actors.
- Japan's voice acting community had been sounding the alarm long before this case: when AI can replicate decades of training in seconds, the livelihoods of performers become acutely fragile.
- TikTok argued the voice was merely generic and male, pushing back against the idea that any AI-generated sound could be legally tied to a specific human being.
- Judge Takahashi rejected that defense, ruling that a voice carries the same legal weight as a face or a name — and that exploiting its commercial appeal without consent is an infringement of publicity rights.
- The account had already deleted its videos before the verdict, leaving Tsuda with a landmark legal principle but no practical takedown order — a victory that is real but incomplete.
- TikTok offered measured words about balance and respect, while Japan's entertainment industry now holds its first piece of legal ground in a much larger fight over who owns the human voice in the age of AI.
In a Tokyo courtroom, a question as old as identity itself was given a modern answer: a human voice, shaped by years of craft and care, belongs to the person who made it. Judge Aya Takahashi ruled in favor of actor Kenjiro Tsuda, whose distinctive baritone had been cloned by an anonymous TikTok account to narrate occult videos for hundreds of thousands of subscribers. The verdict marks the first time a Japanese court has extended publicity rights to the voice, placing it alongside the face and name as a protected expression of personhood. In doing so, it draws a line between technological possibility and human dignity — a line that courts, industries, and algorithms will now have to learn to respect.
On a Wednesday in late September 2026, a Tokyo district court issued a ruling that will be felt far beyond the courtroom. The case centered on Kenjiro Tsuda, a 55-year-old actor whose voice — deep, lustrous, unmistakable — has given life to beloved anime characters including Kento Nanami in Jujutsu Kaisen. Between mid-2024 and late 2025, an anonymous TikTok account uploaded 188 videos narrated by what appeared to be a cloned version of that voice, discussing urban legends and conspiracy theories. At its peak, the account had more than 200,000 subscribers and was generating meaningful monthly revenue.
Tsuda sued. TikTok's defense was that the voice in the videos was simply a generic male voice — plausible, but not provably his. Judge Aya Takahashi was unconvinced. In her ruling, she declared that a human voice deserves the same legal protection as a face, a name, or a likeness — describing it as "as symbolic of one's personality as portraits are." Protection applies, she wrote, when a voice is used specifically to exploit its commercial appeal. It was the first time a Japanese court had extended publicity rights to the voice itself.
The ruling matters because Japan's voice acting industry is not a footnote — it is a cultural institution. Voice actors achieve genuine stardom, recognized and compensated for the specific qualities they have spent careers developing. The Japan Actors Union had argued before the verdict that a performer's voice is the product of years of rigorous training, and that AI replication without consent is not merely copying a sound — it is appropriating the commercial value of a life's work.
There is a bittersweet edge to the victory. The anonymous account deleted its videos shortly after Tsuda filed suit, so the judge declined to order a removal that was already moot. Tsuda won the principle, but not the remedy. TikTok responded with careful language about respecting the judgment and balancing technology with rights protection, without admitting wrongdoing or committing to concrete changes.
The verdict arrives as Japan's entertainment industry has grown sharply anxious about AI, with actors already organizing under campaigns opposing unauthorized use of their likenesses. This ruling gives that movement its first legal foothold — establishing that a voice is not a generic resource to be harvested, but a protected dimension of identity. How far that protection extends will depend on how other courts read this precedent, and whether the industry and technology companies can find a framework that honors both human craft and the possibilities of innovation.
On Wednesday, a Tokyo district court made a decision that will reshape how Japan's entertainment industry thinks about artificial intelligence and the human voice. The ruling came in a case brought by Kenjiro Tsuda, a 55-year-old actor whose voice has become synonymous with anime—he is the voice of Kento Nanami in the wildly popular series Jujutsu Kaisen. Between July 2024 and September 2025, an anonymous TikTok account uploaded 188 videos narrated by what Tsuda's legal team described as a cloned version of his distinctive baritone. The account's profile picture resembled his anime character. The videos discussed urban legends, the occult, and conspiracy theories. At its peak, the account had more than 200,000 subscribers and, according to Tsuda's complaint, generated between ¥500,000 and ¥75,000 in monthly revenue—somewhere in the range of £2,395 to roughly £360 per video.
Tsuda sued, claiming the voice was unmistakably his own—deep, lustrous, shaped by decades of professional training. TikTok's defense was simpler: the voice in the videos was generic, male, and any resemblance to Tsuda's was subjective. The platform argued there was no way to prove the AI had specifically copied him rather than simply generated a plausible male voice.
Judge Aya Takahashi disagreed. In her ruling, she declared that a human voice deserves the same legal protection as any other aspect of a person's identity—their face, their name, their likeness. She described a voice as "as symbolic of one's personality as portraits are." The protection applies, she wrote, when someone uses a voice "exclusively to take advantage of its commercial appeal." This is the first time a Japanese court has extended publicity rights—the legal concept that lets people control and profit from their own identity—to the human voice itself.
The ruling carries weight precisely because it is first. Japan's voice acting industry is vast and culturally significant in ways that may not be obvious outside the country. Voice actors achieve genuine stardom. They are recognized, celebrated, and paid for the distinctive qualities of their voices—the timbre, the cadence, the emotional range that comes from years of training and apprenticeship. Yuko Sasaki, executive director of the Japan Actors Union, emphasized this before the verdict: a performer's voice "is the result of years of rigorous training and apprenticeship." When an AI can replicate that voice without permission and use it to generate revenue, it is not simply copying a sound. It is appropriating years of work and the commercial value that work has created.
Tsuda's legal team described the TikTok account's content as "sordid" and argued that it had attracted its 200,000 subscribers precisely because it had deployed the "attractive voice of a popular actor." Remove that voice, they suggested, and the account would have been unremarkable. The judge seemed to accept this logic. She found that the unauthorized use of Tsuda's voice constituted an infringement on his publicity rights.
There is one wrinkle in the victory. By the time the court issued its ruling, the TikTok account had already deleted the videos—it did so shortly after Tsuda filed suit in November 2025. The judge therefore declined to order their removal, since they no longer existed. Tsuda won the legal principle but not the practical remedy of taking the content down.
TikTok responded with a statement saying it would "respect the court's judgment while considering what steps to take" and pledged to continue working on "the balance between technology development and rights protection." The company did not acknowledge wrongdoing or commit to specific changes in how it moderates AI-generated content.
The ruling arrives as Japan's entertainment industry has grown increasingly anxious about AI. In 2024, actors launched a campaign called "No More" to oppose the unauthorized use of their faces and voices in AI-generated content. This verdict gives that movement legal standing. It establishes that a voice is not a generic resource available for anyone to copy and commercialize—it is a protected aspect of a person's identity, as specific and defensible as a photograph or a signature. What happens next depends on how broadly other courts interpret this precedent, and whether the entertainment industry and technology companies can negotiate a framework that protects performers without freezing innovation entirely.
Notable Quotes
The unauthorised use of a performer's voice can be considered an infringement on publicity rights— Judge Aya Takahashi
A performer's voice is the result of years of rigorous training and apprenticeship— Yuko Sasaki, executive director of the Japan Actors Union
Want the full story?
Read the original at The Guardian ↗
Crime & Justice