- November 2024: Aero Cosmetics made multiple unsuccessful attempts to contact Schmitman for additional voice-over work after previous collaborations
- March 2025: Unknown employee used AI technology to adapt Schmitman’s prior recordings for updated script language in instructional video
- Recent weeks: Schmitman contacted company objecting to AI voice use; CEO Brian Phillips learned of unauthorized adaptation
- Tuesday: Aero Cosmetics filed preemptive federal lawsuit seeking declaratory relief
According to court documents, Aero Cosmetics had previously engaged Schmitman for legitimate voice-over work promoting the company’s vehicle wax and wash products. When attempts to secure his services for new projects went unanswered, an employee took matters into their own hands.
The complaint, filed as case number 5:25-cv-01127, details how the rogue employee “used an AI resource to adapt the prior recording of the referenced voice-over to recite updated script language” around March 2025. Court filings indicate the AI-generated voice was used exclusively in an instructional video for existing customers, with “no revenues attributable to that video.”
Company records show CEO Phillips remained unaware of the AI adaptation until Schmitman’s complaint brought it to his attention. Upon discovery, Aero Cosmetics “withdrew all known uses of the adaptation and issued multiple apologies to Schmitman,” according to the federal filing.
The company characterizes Schmitman’s legal demand as containing “incendiary language, accusing Aero Cosmetics, such as ‘stealing,’ ‘scheme,’ and with a multitude of ‘!’s.”
Schmitman’s professional background includes narrating the 1987 documentary “Tiltrotor and the Future” about V-22 Osprey aircraft, appearing in History Channel’s “Fly Past,” and voicing an air traffic controller role in “Baywatch,” according to IMDb records.
What This Lawsuit Does: Rather than wait for Schmitman to file suit, Aero Cosmetics seeks a preemptive declaratory judgment—essentially asking a federal judge to rule that no valid legal claims exist against the company.
The legal landscape for AI voice cloning involves several potential claims:
