Jason Momoa's German voice actor to sue Netflix over AI training

What's going on

Voice actor Matti Klemm plans to sue Netflix. Klemm is the German voice of Jason Momoa and Mahershala Ali, and for some time now he has also voiced Benjamin Blümchen, the elephant from the hugely popular German children's audio drama series. According to Klemm, Netflix trained AI systems on his voice recordings without asking him and without paying him. On November 3, 2026, the German voice actors' association Verband Deutscher Sprecher:innen (VDS), of which Klemm is a member, announced the lawsuit. Klemm says his personality rights, his copyright and his data protection rights have been violated. He is backed by the Berlin-based Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (GFF, Society for Civil Rights), a civil liberties organization that regularly brings test cases. The lawsuit is set to be filed at the end of 2026. Golem, the news agency dpa and the industry outlet Voice Over Herald have reported on the case.

How Klemm found out: a simple data access request

The trigger wasn't a whistleblower or a data leak. It was a right everyone in Europe has. Under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), you can ask any company which personal data it holds about you and what it uses that data for. Klemm filed exactly that request with Netflix. According to the VDS, the response shows that Netflix "had already, in the past and without Klemm's knowledge or consent, trained AI systems on his personal voice recordings."

The order of events is key. Since early 2026, voice actors working on Netflix productions in Germany have been asked to sign new rights agreements, which the VDS calls "AOR." They state that recordings may be used to train AI. According to the GFF, Klemm never signed these clauses. His voice was nonetheless fed into training "without any contractual basis." His lawyer, Dr. Jonas Kahl of the law firm Spirit Legal, says:

"Netflix itself confirmed to our client that it uses his voice to train its own systems. He was never asked and never paid. We will take this all the way to the highest court if necessary."

Klemm himself says on the GFF's campaign page that he fears AI is meant to take over his work: "I'm not going to put up with that!"

What the lawsuit aims to achieve

The GFF names three goals. First, Netflix should disclose how much of Klemm's voice data was used and which AI systems were trained on it. The response so far confirms the use but doesn't explain enough. Second, a court should bar Netflix from using Klemm's voice for AI training in the future. Third, the court should establish that he is entitled to damages. Other affected voice actors should later be able to rely on that ruling.

It won't be cheap. According to the GFF, taking the case through every instance could cost a six-figure sum. That's why the organization is raising money through its campaign "Unser Werk, unser Recht" ("Our work, our right") for this and other strategic lawsuits.

Netflix's position

Netflix's statement to dpa was brief. The company said it takes the current discussions seriously. It also pointed to an AI agreement it signed last year with the German actors' union Bundesverband Schauspiel (BFFS), which it says strengthens protections for voice actors.

"Netflix's use of AI complies with applicable law."

Beyond that, Netflix has not commented on the planned lawsuit. As Reuters reported via the Economic Times, the BFFS agreement requires explicit written consent before an AI-generated digital replica of a voice is used. But the union deliberately left out rules on pay for AI uses, because there are "currently no reference points for appropriate base compensation" and it wanted to avoid locking in unfavorable terms. Using a voice replica and training an AI on recordings are two different things. That gap is exactly where the dispute lies.

A conflict that's been simmering for months

The lawsuit is the latest escalation in a dispute that began in the spring. According to the Economic Times and Reuters, German voice actors called for a boycott of Netflix at the time. Many refused to sign the new clauses, and some dubbing productions ground to a halt. Netflix wrote to the voice actors saying their concerns were based on a misunderstanding of how the recordings would be used. According to VDS chair Anna-Sophia Lumpe, the letter ended by noting that if the boycott continued, content in Germany would only be shown with subtitles instead of a dubbed version.

In February, according to the GFF, more than 2,100 people supported a fundraiser for an initial legal opinion. In April, the VDS hired Spirit Legal to take the matter to data protection authorities. The argument: voice recordings that can identify a voice actor and be used to replicate them are biometric data under the GDPR. That category covers physical characteristics such as fingerprints or faces, which are subject to particularly strict rules. On top of that, consent is neither freely given nor informed if refusing means losing the role. In early September, Klemm and other voice actors filed a complaint with the Berlin data protection commissioner. The VDS also asked Germany's Federal Cartel Office to examine whether Netflix is abusing its market power. Many voice actors felt "forced for economic reasons" to sign the clauses.

Viewers are already noticing the fallout. According to Moviepilot, six German voices were replaced in "Lupin" Part 4, including Anne Helm, who voices Ludivine Sagnier's character Claire. Helm publicly supports Klemm: "We're not just fighting for ourselves, but for recognition of the work of all creatives."

Reports differ on the size of the VDS. Voice Over Herald puts it at around 700 voice actors in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, while the Reuters report from the spring cited around 600 members.

Analysis

This case reaches well beyond the dubbing industry. VDS chief Lumpe says many corporations have spent years using copyrighted works and personal data for AI training without asking the people behind them. The lawsuit aims to clarify whether that was legal. The approach is new: Klemm isn't relying only on copyright, where AI training is legally contested, but primarily on data protection. If a court classifies voice recordings as biometric data, the bar for using them in training would be high. That could affect dubbing, audiobook and commercial voice actors across Europe.

Internationally, things are moving in a similar direction. In the US, members of the SAG-AFTRA union just ratified a contract for animated series under which a digital voice replica may only be used with the performer's consent. Netflix recently stressed in Seoul that every dubbed language requires 50 to 60 people and that AI is just a tool. Klemm's lawsuit asks a different question: what happened to the recordings before anyone was even asked? Much remains unclear. It's not known which systems were trained, how much data was involved, or whether Netflix will invoke a different legal basis. A final ruling is likely years away. One practical takeaway: if you're in the EU and want to know what a company is doing with your recordings or data, you can file a GDPR access request, just like Klemm did.