Anyone who has spent time on Genshin Impact fan channels has probably heard an AI version of a favourite character saying something the real voice actor never recorded. Some of it is harmless fan content. Some of it is a business. This week, one of those businesses lost in court.
The Pudong New Area People’s Court in Shanghai has ordered an AI voice conversion service to pay 750,000 yuan, roughly $112,000, in damages to Genshin Impact developer miHoYo for cloning the voices of 63 game characters and selling them as voice packs. The judgment was handed down on June 30, 2026, and became final in September after the company withdrew its appeal.
The money is small by the standards of a company as large as miHoYo. The legal reasoning is not. This article explains what the AI service did, how miHoYo won, why the damages were far lower than it asked for, and why the ruling matters for anyone working with AI voices, in games or anywhere else.
Key takeaways
- A Shanghai based AI voice changer cloned 63 Genshin Impact character voices, sold them as voice packs and used game art in its marketing
- miHoYo asked for 5 million yuan (about $746,000); the court awarded 750,000 yuan (about $112,000) plus an order to stop
- The company lost on two grounds: copyright infringement for using character art and footage, and unfair competition for imitating voices that consumers associate with the game
- The AI firm argued the voices belonged to the voice actors, not miHoYo; the court did not accept that as a defence
- Reports describe it as Shanghai’s first AI voice impersonation ruling, and it sets a marker for how Chinese courts treat cloned character voices
What the AI voice service was doing
According to the court filings reported by The Paper and Automaton, the defendant was an undisclosed Shanghai company running a real time voice conversion service. Users could speak into a microphone and have their voice transformed, live, into another voice using pre made “voice packs.”
The problem was where the voice packs came from. miHoYo said the company had:
- Reproduced the voices of 63 Genshin Impact characters without permission and sold them as voice packs
- Created and published promotional videos for the service using Genshin Impact character images and animations
- Used modified images of the characters as the avatars for each voice pack
- Let users preview character dialogue before buying
In other words, the service was not a general purpose voice tool that happened to be used for Genshin content. It was built and marketed around Genshin characters, from the artwork on the storefront to the demo lines customers could hear.
How the AI company defended itself
The defendant made two arguments that come up in almost every AI voice dispute.
The output is not a copy. The company said its service ran on large scale AI training models, so the resulting voice varied depending on what each user said. Its position was that it was not reproducing a recording, only providing a tool.
The voice belongs to the actor, not the game company. The company argued that any rights in a voice sit with the human voice actor who performed it. If anyone had a claim, it said, it was the actors themselves, not miHoYo.
Both arguments failed.
Why the court ruled for miHoYo
The court looked past the “it is just AI” framing and focused on what the service actually copied and how it was sold.
Voiceprint analysis. Technical comparison found that the vocal characteristics of the AI voices and the real Genshin Impact character voices were nearly identical. The defendant also admitted in court that it had mixed about one minute of audio from a Genshin character into other material to train its voice conversion model. That admission undercut the claim that the output was merely a coincidence of machine learning.
Copyright infringement. The court held that Genshin Impact’s character designs and in game footage are protected artistic and audiovisual works. Using them in promo videos and as voice pack avatars without permission was straightforward copyright infringement, regardless of the AI question.
Unfair competition. This is the part with wider consequences. The court found that because Genshin Impact has been running for years with the same character voices, those voices now function as a distinguishing mark that lets consumers identify the source. Cloning them for a commercial product went beyond the reasonable scope of imitation and could lead customers to mistake the service for an official one. That made it unfair competition under Chinese law.
The court ordered the company to stop the infringing conduct immediately and pay 750,000 yuan.
Why the damages were so much lower than miHoYo wanted
miHoYo asked for 5 million yuan. It received 15 percent of that.
Courts in China, as elsewhere, generally tie damages to provable loss or provable profit. miHoYo does not sell Genshin voice packs, so it could not point to lost sales, and the defendant’s revenue from the packs was presumably modest. The award reflects a finding of infringement rather than a calculation of large financial harm.
That raises an obvious question for the AI industry: is $112,000 a deterrent? For a small operator, probably yes, especially combined with the injunction. For a well funded voice AI company, it is a cost of doing business. The stronger deterrent is the precedent, not the number.
Why this ruling matters beyond Genshin
Character voices can be brand assets. The most important line in the judgment is the finding that a game character’s voice, after long enough use, becomes something consumers use to identify the game. That treats voice more like a trademark than a performance, and it gives publishers a legal route that does not depend on the voice actor bringing the case.
“The actor owns the voice” is not a shield. Voice actors do have rights in their own voices, and cases in the United States, Japan and elsewhere have been built on that. But this ruling shows a company cannot dodge liability by pointing at the actor while it profits from the game’s characters.
A small amount of training data is enough to lose. The defendant admitted using roughly one minute of character audio in training. The court still found the outputs nearly identical. For AI developers, the lesson is that “we only used a little” is not a defence if the result is recognisable.
It lands in the middle of a wider fight. Genshin Impact and its sister game Zenless Zone Zero have been at the centre of the voice acting industry’s AI dispute for two years. The SAG-AFTRA video game strike over AI protections ran from July 2024, and HoYoverse replaced some English voice actors during it, which angered fans. In Japan, Evangelion star Megumi Ogata said this month she was heartbroken by unauthorised AI versions of her voice and asked why the country has no content guidelines. The problem of cloned voices is not limited to games either, as the wave of fake AI content after Dolly Parton’s death showed.
There is also an irony fans have noticed. miHoYo itself launched an AI powered “virtual girlfriend” app, BSide: Olivia Lin, earlier this year and shut it down less than two months later. The company is both a victim of AI misuse and an active builder of AI products.
What it means for players and creators
For fans making Genshin AI voice content: Non commercial fan clips were not what this case was about, and the ruling does not change the rules for them overnight. But the court’s reasoning, that character voices identify the game, gives miHoYo a clear basis to go after anyone selling cloned voices or using them in ways that look official.
For voice actors: The ruling is a mixed result. It confirms that cloned character voices are legally protectable, but it puts the power to enforce that in the publisher’s hands rather than the performer’s.
For AI voice companies: Building a product around recognisable characters without a licence is now a documented losing position in China’s most important commercial court district. The safe path is licensed voices, original voices, or clear consent from both the performer and the rights holder.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the Genshin Impact AI voice damages?
A Shanghai court ordered an AI voice conversion service to pay 750,000 yuan, about $112,000, to Genshin Impact developer miHoYo for cloning 63 character voices without permission and selling them as voice packs. The company must also stop the infringing activity.
Which court ruled on the Genshin Impact AI voice case?
The Pudong New Area People’s Court in Shanghai. The first instance judgment was issued on June 30, 2026, and became final in September 2026 after the defendant withdrew its appeal.
How much did miHoYo ask for?
miHoYo sought 5 million yuan, roughly $746,000, plus an injunction. The court awarded 750,000 yuan, about 15 percent of the request.
Why did the AI company lose?
Voiceprint analysis found the cloned voices nearly identical to the originals, and the company admitted using Genshin audio in training. The court found copyright infringement for the use of character art and footage, and unfair competition because the voices had become a mark that identifies the game to consumers.
Did the AI company argue the voices belonged to the voice actors?
Yes. It argued that voice rights sit with the performers, not miHoYo. The court did not accept this as a defence, because the company was trading on the game’s characters and their recognisable voices.
Is this the first AI voice cloning ruling in China?
Reports describe it as Shanghai’s first AI voice impersonation case. Chinese courts had previously ruled on voice rights for individual performers, but this case is notable for treating game character voices as a commercial identifier belonging to the publisher.
Does this ruling affect fan made Genshin AI voice videos?
Not directly. The case concerned a commercial service selling voice packs and using game art in marketing. However, the reasoning gives miHoYo a stronger basis to act against anyone monetising cloned character voices.
What is miHoYo’s own position on AI?
miHoYo has both sued over AI misuse and built AI products. It launched an AI virtual companion app, BSide: Olivia Lin, in 2026 and shut it down within two months. HoYoverse games were also criticised during the SAG-AFTRA strike for replacing voice actors.
