French authorities have launched legal proceedings against streaming platform Kick following the death of Jean Pormanove during a live broadcast on August 18, 2025. The action targets Kick’s role in hosting and promoting streams that showed months of apparent mistreatment of the French online personality.
Pormanove had been featured for months in livestreams by associates that showed physical mistreatment and humiliation. Despite the disturbing content, Kick allegedly not only allowed the streams to continue but actively promoted them. Multiple sources claim the platform spotlighted the channel and even sold related merchandise.
The death triggered an immediate criminal investigation. Initial medical reports suggest no fatal external trauma was found, with toxicological tests still pending. Some reports mention pre-existing health conditions, though official confirmation remains unavailable.
Before the tragedy, French police had already questioned members of the streaming group Owen Cenazandotti, known as “Narutovie,” and Safine Hamadi, known as “Safine. According to reports, Pormanove told authorities he was participating voluntarily and that segments were scripted. Investigative outlet Mediapart had reportedly alerted the Culture Ministry and ARCOM, France’s media regulator, about the concerning content as early as December 2024.
The legal action against Kick could have severe consequences. Under French law and EU regulations, platforms must act promptly to remove illegal content once they become aware of it. The Digital Services Act allows fines up to 6% of global annual turnover for systemic failures. Individual platform executives could face criminal charges including complicity in violence or moral harassment. The platform responded with the following statement after Jean’s death.
France’s approach marks a significant escalation in holding platforms accountable for content they host. The country’s LCEN digital law from 2004 establishes clear host liability rules. Platforms that fail to act on known illegal content face both civil and criminal exposure.
The case raises questions about platform responsibility for long-running content that crosses legal boundaries. Unlike unexpected violent incidents during streams, months of recurring abusive content presents a different legal challenge. French authorities appear ready to test whether sustained platform inaction constitutes complicity.
Parallel investigations into individuals directly involved in the streams may follow. French criminal code provisions covering assault, harassment, and failure to assist a person in danger could apply depending on what prosecutors establish about the circumstances.
