Billionaire Yusaku Maezawa loses his case against Meta over scam ads using his face: a Tokyo court says the platform is not liable

Is Meta responsible for scam ads that use famous faces? Not under Japanese law, a Tokyo court has ruled, at least in this case. The Tokyo District Court on Tuesday 10 November dismissed billionaire Yusaku Maezawa's lawsuit against Meta and its Japan unit over investment scam advertisements that used his name and image without permission, AFP reported via Malay Mail. The court said Meta "is merely a platform operator and was not directly involved in the posting of the ads", according to broadcaster TBS.

The ruling was not a total loss for Maezawa. The court acknowledged that his publicity rights and portrait rights had been infringed by the ads. But it placed responsibility on the unidentified people who posted them rather than the platform that carried them and earned money from them. For victims of fake celebrity investment ads, which are a major problem across Asia, the decision is a setback.

What Maezawa was trying to prove

Maezawa, who founded Japan's largest online clothing retailer, filed the lawsuit in 2024, saying Meta was "not making efforts" to stop scam ads using his likeness. He sought just one yen in damages, making clear that the case was about principle rather than money. He said he wanted to "clarify whether their actions are legal or not".

Fraudsters commonly use Maezawa's name and photograph to lure victims into fake investment schemes. One typical advert placed his image beside the caption: "Started with 10,000 yen. Gained 1.3 million yen in four days." Such ads usually lead to chat groups or websites where victims are persuaded to transfer money to fake trading platforms.

Maezawa is a natural target for fraudsters because he is famous for his wealth, his art purchases and his trip around the Moon project, and for giving away money on social media. That reputation makes promises of quick riches in his name seem plausible to some viewers.

What Meta argued and the court decided

Meta argued that unidentified posters had placed the advertisements and that the company had no obligation to constantly monitor content to detect and remove rights infringing material, public broadcaster NHK reported. The court accepted that framing, ruling that Meta was a platform operator not directly involved in posting the ads.

The court did agree that the ads infringed Maezawa's rights. That distinction matters: it recognises the harm while placing legal responsibility on the advertisers, who are usually anonymous and often overseas. In practice, that leaves victims with little recourse, because the people who post scam ads are hard to identify and almost impossible to sue.

Neither Maezawa nor Meta could immediately be reached for comment, AFP said. Maezawa may still be able to appeal to a higher court.

The court agreed Maezawa was wronged and then said nobody it could reach was responsible. That gap is exactly where scam ads live.

Why the lawyer is worried

Maezawa's lawyer said after the ruling that "the number of scam ads has not decreased, and even now we are detecting a considerable number of scam ads featuring Mr Maezawa". The lawyer warned of a wider social effect, according to TBS: "I'm worried we'll end up with a society where people think, so in the end, even if you fight in court, it's useless, and quietly resign themselves to their losses."

That concern resonates across Asia, where fake celebrity endorsements are among the most common hooks for investment fraud. Scammers use images of business leaders, politicians and entertainers, increasingly with AI generated video and voice, to promote fake trading platforms and crypto schemes. In Malaysia, authorities have warned of deepfakes of senior officials used in scams, as we reported in our analysis of deepfake scams impersonating Bank Negara and SC officials.

The scale is enormous. The FBI says it has seized 17 billion dollars from scam compounds, as we reported in our coverage of the crackdown on Southeast Asian scam syndicates, and much of the fraud is driven by organised networks operating from compounds in the region. Advertising on large platforms is one of the main ways those networks find victims.

How other countries are treating platforms

Japan's ruling reflects a legal tradition that treats platforms as intermediaries rather than publishers. Other jurisdictions are moving in different directions. Some governments are pushing platforms to verify advertisers, especially for financial products, and to act faster on reports of scam ads. Singapore has introduced measures requiring online platforms to take steps against scams, and regulators in Australia and the United Kingdom have pressed for stronger obligations.

The debate centres on who should bear the cost of fraud. Platforms earn revenue from advertising and have the technical ability to screen ads, while victims and the celebrities whose faces are used have little power. Supporters of stronger rules argue that platforms are best placed to stop scams at the source. Platforms argue that monitoring every ad is impractical and that responsibility lies with fraudsters.

For Japan, the Maezawa ruling suggests that change, if it comes, will need to come from legislation rather than the courts. Japan has been reviewing measures against online fraud, and the ruling may add pressure on lawmakers to clarify platform duties for financial ads.

How to protect yourself from celebrity scam ads

For the public, the lessons are practical:

• treat any ad promising fast, guaranteed investment returns as a red flag
• be suspicious of celebrity endorsements for trading platforms or crypto schemes
• never move a conversation from an ad to a private chat group run by strangers
• check whether an investment firm is licensed with your country's regulator
• report scam ads to the platform and to the police or relevant authority

Celebrities rarely, if ever, promote personal investment schemes through social media ads. If a famous person appears to be offering a way to turn 10,000 yen into 1.3 million in four days, the safest assumption is that the ad is fake.

The Maezawa case also shows that famous people are victims too. Their reputations are exploited to defraud others, and even a billionaire with lawyers has struggled to stop it.

The Maezawa ruling recognises the harm of fake celebrity ads but leaves platforms off the hook under Japanese law. That puts the burden back on lawmakers and on the public. Until rules change, the best defence against a famous face promising easy riches is simple scepticism.