Illinois journalists, podcasters sue tech companies over using their voice to train AI
Nine Illinois journalists, podcasters, and voice actors, including Emmy and Pulitzer Prize winners, have filed lawsuits against 10 tech companies—Amazon, Adobe, Google (Alphabet), Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Meta, ElevenLabs, and NVIDIA—for allegedly using their voice data without consent to train AI systems, violating Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The plaintiffs seek financial compensation, an immediate halt to unauthorized voice data collection, disclosure of data sources, and destruction of AI models trained using their voices.
Seven journalists, podcasters, and voice actors from Illinois have sued 10 major technology companies, alleging their voices were used without consent to train artificial intelligence systems. The lawsuits, filed under Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), name Amazon, Adobe, Google (including Alphabet), Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, Meta, ElevenLabs, and NVIDIA as defendants. Among the plaintiffs are award-winning professionals like Carol Marin (Chicago Tonight), Phil Rogers (NBC Chicago), and Robin Amer (USA Today), alongside voice actors for podcasts and children’s books. The lawsuit claims the companies collected and used voice data—classified as biometric information under BIPA—without permission, violating Illinois law. BIPA protects unique biological identifiers, including voiceprints, and allows penalties of up to $5,000 per intentional violation. The plaintiffs argue their voices, unlike replaceable data like credit card numbers, cannot be recovered if misused. The lawsuits demand immediate cessation of unauthorized voice data collection, disclosure of data sources, and destruction of AI models trained using their voices. Attorney Ross Kimbarovsky, representing the group, emphasized the irreparable nature of voice theft, stating, ‘You cannot get a new voice.’ The American Civil Liberties Union (Illinois) also criticized the practice, calling biometric data permanent and irreversible once exposed. This legal action follows similar lawsuits in New York and California, reflecting growing concerns over AI training practices. None of the named companies responded to requests for comment before publication. The case highlights broader debates over consent, data privacy, and the ethical implications of AI development using unlicensed biometric information.
This content was automatically generated and/or translated by AI. It may contain inaccuracies. Please refer to the original sources for verification.