The final 3 paragraphs of the article made me say wtf

An analysis found strong similarities between Tsuda's voice and the AI, which the plaintiff said misled viewers. The person who posted the videos was allegedly earning between 500,000 and 750,000 yen ($3,200 to $4,800) per month, using Tsuda's voice traits to increase commercial value.

That's more than I expected AI slop would make.

The operator of TikTok claimed the narration employed a "standard male voice" and would not be mistaken for Tsuda, while the poster said the AI was trained using a friend's voice.

These assertions seem like they would both be trivial to prove or disprove. It seems weird that the company and the poster would make contradictory statements for something so easy to prove.

They also argued there was no merit to the lawsuit as the account had been deleted by June 29.

!!! Nothing screams "I am completely innocent," like closing your account and giving up $3200 per month.

I'm skeptical of this ruling because far, far too many people have similarly-sounding voices. As long as the video maker wasn't claiming it was that guy's voice, how can he have standing?

This puts anyone with a similar voice to a famous person at risk of a lawsuit.