Detect Deepfakesby Resemble AI
Deepfake case study · Audio

Jarosław Łukomski voice deepfake — Nov 2024

A Warsaw court ruled that a company using an AI-generated voice clone of voice actor Jarosław Łukomski without his consent constitutes a deepfake

Incident date
Nov 13, 2024
Source report date
Nov 14, 2026
Target
Jarosław Łukomski
Updated Nov 15, 2026 · 2 min read

A Landmark Ruling for Voice Rights

In a significant legal development for the voice-over industry, a Warsaw court ruled on November 13, 2024, that the unauthorized use of an AI-generated voice clone constitutes a deepfake. The case involved Jarosław Łukomski, a prominent Polish film reader, who sued JFC Polska after discovering his voice had been synthesized for the company's advertisements without his knowledge or consent.

What happened

Jarosław Łukomski, who has worked as a lektor since 1983, discovered that JFC Polska, a manufacturer of home sewage treatment tanks, was using a voice nearly identical to his own in their promotional materials. Łukomski never recorded the ads nor authorized the use of his likeness. During the trial, which began in January 2024, a company graphic designer testified that he had utilized AI tools—reportedly ElevenLabs—to create narrators for various advertisements by editing samples from a voice library.

An expert appointed by the court concluded that the voice in the advertisements was "deceptively similar" to Łukomski’s. Judge Sylwia Wit vel Wilk ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering JFC Polska to remove the infringing material, publish apologies on their website and social media, and pay damages totaling approximately 47,000 zlotys (roughly $11,760) plus trial costs.

Crucially, the court defined the incident as a deepfake because the AI-generated voice was used to attribute statements to Łukomski that he never made, thereby breaching his rights to his image and privacy. The judge emphasized that this protection extends to every individual, regardless of their fame, establishing a precedent that businesses cannot hide behind AI software providers when their use of a cloned voice infringes on personal rights. While the ruling is not yet final and the company may appeal, the decision marks a pivotal moment for voice actors seeking legal recourse against unauthorized AI synthesis.

Sources