Protecting the Persona: Delhi High Court Issues Sweeping Injunction Against AI-Driven Personality Theft

In a landmark order, the High Court of Delhi has stepped in to shield global icon Aishwarya Rai Bachchan from the unauthorized and exploitative use of her image, voice, and name, particularly through the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Justice Tejas Karia granted an ad-interim ex-parte injunction, signaling a robust judicial stance against the digital misappropriation of celebrity personas.

The Backdrop of the Dispute

The litigation arises from a pervasive misuse of Ms. Bachchan’s identity across the digital landscape. The Plaintiff, a globally recognized actress and brand ambassador, sought relief against a diverse array of infringers, including websites masquerading as her "official" portal, vendors selling unauthorized merchandise, and, most alarmingly, platforms hosting AI-generated deepfakes and sexually suggestive chatbot interactions.

The case involves a complex web of defendants—ranging from small e-commerce entities to large digital platforms—who the Plaintiff alleges have built a business model around the illegal monetization of her likeness.

The Legal Battle: Arguments for Dignity and Control

Representing the Plaintiff, Senior Counsel Sandeep Sethi argued that Ms. Bachchan’s personality rights—encompassing her name, image, signature, and likeness—have acquired unique commercial value. The core of the argument rested on the premise that any unauthorized commercial exploitation not only infringes upon her right to publicity but also poses a direct threat to her reputation and right to live with dignity.

The Plaintiff highlighted that AI tools, including deepfakes and face-morphing, are being used to place her in compromising, false, and inappropriate scenarios. This, the counsel argued, creates a deceptive perception of endorsement or association, causing irreparable harm to her goodwill.

Judicial Reasoning: A Shield for Celebrity Identity

The Court’s analysis leaned heavily on the evolving jurisprudence regarding personality rights in India. Referencing notable precedents such as * Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India *, the Court underscored that while free speech is a protected right, it cannot be weaponized to tarnish, blacken, or jeopardize an individual's personality.

In Anil Kapoor , the Court observed that a celebrity's right of endorsement is a fundamental source of livelihood that cannot be destroyed by the unauthorized sale of merchandise. Similarly, the Court here recognized that the unauthorized use of technological tools like Generative AI to clone a personality constitutes a profound violation of both commercial interests and personal autonomy.

Key Observations

The judgment is marked by the Court’s firm recognition of the intersection between technology and human rights. Among the pivotal observations were:

• "When the identity of a famous personality is used without their consent or authorization, it may not only lead to commercial detriment to the concerned individual but also impact their right to live with dignity."
• "Any infringement of the Plaintiff’s Personality Rights... will also lead to dilution of the Plaintiff’s reputation and goodwill."
• "The celebrity’s right of endorsement would in fact be a major source of livelihood for the celebrity, which cannot be destroyed completely by permitting unlawful dissemination and sale of merchandise."
• "The Plaintiff has established a good prima facie case, and the balance of convenience also tilts in her favour."

The Court’s Directive

The Delhi High Court has issued a wide-reaching restraining order against the identified Defendants. They are barred from exploiting, in any manner, the Plaintiff’s name, image, or persona—including through the use of Artificial Intelligence, deepfakes, or machine learning.

Crucially, the Court directed major platforms and government authorities to: 1. Remove Infringing Content: Platforms are mandated to take down, remove, or disable specific URLs within 72 hours of notice. 2. Disclose Data: Defendants must provide subscriber information, including IP logs and contact details of the operators behind the infringing activity, to facilitate further legal action. 3. Government Action: The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Department of Telecommunications are tasked with ensuring compliance by disabling access to the listed infringing portals.

This order stands as a stern warning to those exploiting the digital age to infringe upon individual personality rights, reinforcing the judiciary’s commitment to protecting the sanctity of personal identity in the era of AI.