Tokyo District Court Rules Voice Actors Have Right of Publicity in Landmark Decision; Tsuda Kenjiro Case Closed After Dismissal

Overview

The Tokyo District Court recently handed down a ruling in a lawsuit filed by voice actor Kenjiro Tsuda. The core dispute centered on whether the TikTok operator should remove video content that used generative AI to mimic Tsuda’s voice. In its judgment, the court explicitly recognized for the first time that a voice actor’s voice is protected under the “right of publicity” (publicity right), meaning that public figures enjoy exclusive control over the proprietary value embodied in their voices.

Although the court made this landmark legal finding, it ultimately dismissed Tsuda’s specific request for deletion of the videos. This outcome primarily rested on the fact that the videos in question had already been deleted by the platform itself, rendering any continued demand for deletion practically unnecessary.

Key Points of the Ruling and Legal Significance

First Recognition of a Publicity Right in Voice

The most significant judicial breakthrough in this case was the Tokyo District Court (Presiding Judge: Saori Takahashi) acknowledging the personality and property rights attributes of a voice. While publicity rights protections for images and names have long been clear, legal protection for voices has often existed in a gray area in legal practice. This ruling filled that gap, clarifying that the voices of famous voice actors possess identifiable economic value and are entitled to equal legal protection.

Reasons for Dismissal of the Claim

While the court affirmed the existence of the publicity right, it dismissed the plaintiff’s specific request. The rationale was that the plaintiff’s original objective—deleting the infringing uploaded videos—had already been achieved. The videos at issue were deleted by the platform during the course of the litigation; therefore, the court determined there was no further need for a mandatory deletion order through judgment. In Japanese civil procedure, such a situation where the “purpose has been accomplished” typically leads to the dismissal of the claim. However, this does not mean the plaintiff lost the case, but rather reflects the interplay between litigation strategy and the actual circumstances.

Industry Reactions and Future Outlook

Statement from the Legal Team

The legal team representing Kenjiro Tsuda commented on the ruling, emphasizing that although the case concluded with a “dismissal of claims,” the core objective of protecting voice rights has been achieved. In their statement, they said:

“Although the result was a dismissal of the claims, it is crucial that the original goal of ‘deleting the target posts’ was accomplished.”

The statement also highly praised Mr. Kenjiro Tsuda’s actions, expressing sincere respect, and noted that regardless of the differing forms, the industry’s resolve to eradicate unauthorized AI-generated content remains consistent.

Industry Impact and Subsequent Challenges

This case is regarded as an important milestone for rights protection in the voice acting industry. Despite not obtaining a mandatory injunction from the court, judicial recognition of the voice publicity right lays a solid jurisprudential foundation for future similar cases.

The legal team called for using this case as a starting point to guide the industry toward rational discussion focused on fundamental issues. The voice acting industry will unite and continue to push for resolutions. Meanwhile, all parties must explore new approaches to balancing technological innovation with the protection of artists’ rights in the context of rapidly evolving AI technologies.