Tokyo court rules that a person’s voice can be protected from AI cloning
A landmark Tokyo court decision recognises voices as part of publicity rights, adding to the growing legal debate around AI-generated performances and artists’ identities.
A person’s voice can be protected under publicity rights in Japan, following a landmark court ruling that could have implications for AI-generated music and entertainment. The decision recognises that a performer’s vocal identity can have commercial value, even as questions remain over how existing laws apply to AI-generated imitations.
The Tokyo District Court delivered its ruling on the 30th of September, following a lawsuit brought by actor and voice artist Kenjiro Tsuda against TikTok. The case is believed to be Japan’s first legal challenge seeking to protect someone’s vocal identity against AI-generated copies.
Why Kenjiro Tsuda took TikTok to court
Tsuda, known for voicing Kento Nanami in Jujutsu Kaisen and Seto Kaiba in Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters, filed his lawsuit in November 2025 over videos he said used an AI-generated imitation of his distinctive voice.
As The Guardian reports, an anonymous TikTok account had published 188 videos between July 2024 and September 2025, featuring narration about urban legends, the occult and conspiracy theories. The account attracted more than 200,000 followers, and Tsuda’s lawyers estimated it could have generated ¥500,000 to ¥750,000 per month through TikTok’s view-based creator payouts.
TikTok disputed the allegations, arguing that the videos used a generic male voice and that any resemblance to Tsuda was subjective. The platform also said the account holder claimed to have trained the voice model on a friend’s voice.
What did the court actually decide?
The court ruled that a person’s voice can fall under publicity rights when it is used specifically to exploit its commercial appeal. Presiding judge Aya Takahashi described the voice as a symbol of someone’s personality, comparable to their likeness.
However, the court dismissed Tsuda’s request to have the videos removed. The anonymous account had already been deleted in May 2026, meaning there was nothing left for TikTok to take down. Crucially, the judgment did not determine whether Tsuda’s own rights had actually been infringed, and he did not seek damages.
What the ruling means for AI-generated music
The decision arrives as Japan looks to clarify how existing laws apply to generative AI. Music Business Worldwide notes that in August, a Justice Ministry expert committee published guidance recognising that voices can be protected alongside likenesses, specifically highlighting unauthorised AI cover songs featuring singers’ voices.
The issue is also playing out elsewhere. In the US, Tennessee’s ELVIS Act introduced protections for artists’ voices and likenesses against unauthorised AI use, while the proposed NO FAKES Act seeks to establish federal protections.
It follows other legal challenges involving AI and artists’ identities, including the lawsuit brought by Jason Isbell and other artists against Suno.
Japan’s ruling doesn’t settle when an AI-generated imitation crosses the line into unlawful use. But it establishes an important principle for future cases: a person’s voice can have protectable commercial value, not just their face or name.