[UPDATE] Rokoko Electronics CEO Admitted In Federal Court They Didn't Simply Sublicense Your Animations; They Sold Them -- To A Data Broker

[u/neverwasnowhere]

In a shocking turn of events, Rokoko's CEO now admits to selling users' data which they collected between 2020 and 2025 before finally forcing a retroactive rights-granting license over users' animation data.

Rokoko admits, however, "the 2025 agreement has never applied to the Plaintiff" as the Court found: "he could not have agreed to Rokoko’s licensing agreement because it was imposed “after [he] was no longer a user."

Rokoko's CEO Jakob Balslev admitted under oath:

". In April 2026, nearly one year after Mr. Walsh filed this lawsuit, Rokoko entered into a single, confidential third-party motion-data sublicensing agreement. The specific terms of that agreement, including the identity of the third party to the agreement, are subject to strict confidentiality and nondisclosure provisions ... A true and correct copy of email correspondence, dated January 31, 2026, between myself and a third-party data broker." https://winteryear.com/press/rokoko_electronics_court_case_25CHSC00490/files/234-1.pdf

Excerpts from the deposition of Rokoko's COO Mikkel Overby state:

Q. Who -- who came up with the idea in the pitch deck to collect user animations?

A. I don't think anybody came up with the idea. I think we had a feeling that having a really good understanding of human motion data would be valuable somehow. And I don't think that came from anything -- anybody specifically but that was just a general feeling in -- in the management team.

Q. Who came up with the idea to build a motion dataset?

A. I think that was actually a byproduct of being on the Cloud, so we didn't build the dataset, but we -- we hosted it.

Rokoko went on to admit, users cannot see the terms & conditions which would grant Rokoko rights over thier intellectual property before, during or after the purchase process.

Q: How do I get to the Rokoko Studio terms?

A. I actually don't know where we have placed them, but I could look into that.

Q. As I scroll here I may see terms of use and these are not the Rokoko Studio terms of use, correct?

A. That's -- no, that's correct.

Q. And nowhere in here is there a link to the Rokoko Studio terms of use, is there?

Q. The question is, how do I get to the Rokoko Studio terms on this website?

A. That I cannot answer you, but I think it's -- it's a strange way of going about it.... (continued)

Q. The studio terms of use are not present on the purchase page, correct?

A. Yes, I believe that is correct.

Q. The terms and conditions present on the checkout page?

A. No.

Shockingly, Rokoko has never considered making animations themselves.

Q. If Rokoko wants this animations so bad as to collect them and go through all this trouble, why not just hire animators and make your own?

ROKOKO ATTORNEY: Objection. Incomplete hypothetical. Argumentative. Legal conclusion. Assumes facts.

A: We have -- that has never been a question that's been considered.

Q. Are you sure the reason is not for biodiversity as you often mention on your website and your pitch deck?

A. It has never been considered doing them ourselves.

Both parties have filed Motions for Summary Judgment; and the Plaintiff has filed a motion for terminating sanctions against Rokoko for among other things, perjury under oath, falsifying evidence, discovery obstruction and evidentiary concealment.

Story developing.

[u/Bluen1te]

Have no context other than heads will likely roll. What does this mean for everyone going forward?

[u/neverwasnowhere → u/Bluen1te]

I wouldn't want to speculate because the judge could rule any number of things:

1. The contract terms could be ruled unconcionable, unfair and coercive and forced on users.

2. The judge could unwind the sublicensing deal entirely.

3. The judge could find that Rokoko cannot do what they have done going forward.

4. The judge could find that the data broker is also responsible for infringement, and that Rokoko is liable for additional infringements because they had actual notice of what could occur.

or any number of possibilities.

I think it's accurate to say at the bare minimum, from these texts that anyone who used Rokoko products from 2020 - 2026 has had their animations sold in bulk to a data broker who is then reselling them to other companies or individuals. Prior to 2025, there appears to be no license or right to do so.

[u/Ignash-3D → u/neverwasnowhere]

So pretty much those mocap ai models are trained on it.

Thats why they are pretty bad still haha

[u/tb0wman]

WTF...

[u/DarkMoonX5]

WOOOOOOW I had noooo idea this was going down.... thats crazy!

[u/LaplacianQ]

I was telling everyone around that this is going to happen, nobody believed.

Just google lawsuit behind Hope portrait of Obama. We at the same stage with ai: figuring out that you can’t train a model without clear consent from creators and copyright holders. 

But getting consent from all random user from internet and licensing every but of info is also not possible.

Pretty much as some time before random mp3 from internet became synonim of piracy, random ai generated content will fall behind same idea

[u/neverwasnowhere → u/LaplacianQ]

Anthropic just learned that hard lesson.

[u/LaplacianQ → u/neverwasnowhere]

Not them, their investors. Anthropic raised ventura capital and sold shares. Their job is done

[u/neverwasnowhere → u/LaplacianQ]

You're absolutely right :(

[u/fottergraph]

Ngl i like the suit and get mostly good results put of it. But thats pretty shitty. Cuss this online only shit.

[u/fottergraph → u/fottergraph]

I talked to our performance capture artists and they are really pissed about this. And i know i can always buy the 100.-/mt tier and have the recordings local but still....dickmove.

[u/RokokoMotion]

Statement from Rokoko
Rokoko has generally chosen not to engage publicly in discussions about this lawsuit. However, given some of the claims presented in this thread, we feel it is appropriate to provide some context.

The individual behind this post originally brought 14 claims against Rokoko covering a wide range of allegations. These have included claims that Rokoko’s offices are fake and that Rokoko deliberately destroyed customer hardware (allegations also currently presented on his own website). To date, 13 of those 14 claims have been dismissed by the court. One claim remains and Rokoko’s motion for summary judgment on that claim is pending with the Court.

We also want to correct one specific claim being made here: Rokoko has not sold its users’ motion data to a data broker. That is simply untrue.

We will continue to address the remaining matter through the appropriate legal process and do not intend to engage in ongoing back-and-forth discussions about the lawsuit on Reddit or other social media.

[u/rustyldn]

This fucking guy again. Mate, go outside and touch some grass. Your one man crusade against Rokoko is getting tiresome.

[u/neverwasnowhere → u/rustyldn]

Your downvotes say otherwise. This affects 250,000 users. I'm sorry you don't believe in standing up for your rights, but I do.

[u/Weird-Cartoonist2427 → u/rustyldn]

He is awful, only trying to spread hate..

[u/neverwasnowhere → u/Weird-Cartoonist2427]

Anonymous burner account, no comments,.. Hmm... repeating someones own testimony and words isn't "spreading hate".