Kumar Sanu Sues to Protect Voice and Likeness from AI Cloning, Invoking Moral and Personality Rights

New Delhi – In a significant legal development at the intersection of intellectual property, technology, and celebrity rights, legendary Indian playback singer Kumar Sanu has approached the Delhi High Court seeking comprehensive protection for his personality and publicity rights. The suit, filed against various named and unnamed defendants ("John Does"), raises critical questions about the unauthorized use of an artist's persona, particularly through advanced artificial intelligence (AI) technologies.

The matter is slated to be heard by Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora on October 13, 2025. This case joins a growing list of high-profile personality rights litigations before the Delhi High Court, which is rapidly carving out a niche as a key forum for adjudicating on the rights of public figures in the digital age.

The suit, filed through advocates Shikha Sachdeva and Sana Raees Khan, seeks to protect a wide array of Sanu's personal attributes from unauthorized commercial exploitation. These include not just his name and likeness but also his distinct "voice, vocal style and technique, vocal arrangements and interpretations, mannerism and manner of singing, images, caricatures, photographs, likeness and signature."

The Core Allegations: AI, Memes, and Moral Rights

At the heart of Mr. Sanu's plea is the contention that his identity is being unlawfully monetized and misrepresented by third parties. The suit highlights two primary areas of concern: the use of his persona in low-brow digital content and the more technologically sophisticated threat posed by AI.

The singer claims he is aggrieved by a proliferation of GIFs, audio clips, and video recordings that use his performances and voice to create content that brings him "disrepute" and makes him a subject of "unsavoury humour." This, the plea argues, constitutes a violation of his moral rights as a performer, which are specifically protected under Section 38B of the Copyright Act, 1957. This provision grants performers the right to claim authorship and to restrain or claim damages for any distortion, mutilation, or other modification of their performance that would be prejudicial to their reputation.

However, the more novel and pressing challenge outlined in the suit stems from the rise of generative AI. Mr. Sanu has expressed serious concern over content created using AI to clone his voice, replicate his unique singing style, and even morph his face onto other visuals. This extends to the creation of unauthorized merchandise featuring his AI-generated likeness and voice.

The suit explicitly details the commercial nature of this infringement, stating, "Such merchandise and audios/videos of the plaintiff generate revenues for the defendants, as they are uploaded and streamed on social networking websites including but not limited to Facebook, Instagram and Youtube which generates revenue based on the number of clicks or views to a particular image/ video."

By linking his persona to unauthorized content and products, these acts, according to the plea, also amount to "false endorsements and passing off," which must be restrained by an injunction from the court.

Legal Framework: Personality Rights and Copyright Act

While India does not have a specific statute codifying "personality rights," courts have consistently recognized them as an amalgamation of the right to privacy and the right of publicity. The right to privacy protects an individual from emotional and dignitary harm, while the right of publicity secures the commercial value inherent in their identity. The Delhi High Court, in particular, has been proactive in granting protection to celebrities against the misuse of their persona.

This case is distinguished by its strong reliance on Section 38B of the Copyright Act, linking the violation of personality rights directly to the statutory protection of a performer's moral rights. This dual-pronged approach—arguing both common law rights of publicity and statutory moral rights—provides a robust legal foundation for the singer's claims. It posits that the unauthorized use is not just a commercial violation but an affront to the artist's integrity and reputation, a harm explicitly recognized by copyright law.

Context: Delhi High Court's Jurisprudence on Celebrity Rights

Mr. Sanu's lawsuit comes at a time when the Delhi High Court is actively shaping the jurisprudence on personality rights. The court has recently passed a series of orders protecting public figures from similar infringements. As noted in the source materials, Justice Arora himself recently granted an injunction to journalist Sudhir Chaudhary against misleading, AI-generated videos.

This follows a trend where coordinate benches have provided relief to prominent figures such as "The Art of Living" founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, actor Nagarjuna, and Bollywood personalities Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan, and Karan Johar. These precedents suggest a judicial inclination to recognize and protect the intrinsic value of a celebrity's persona against unauthorized digital and AI-driven exploitation.

The outcome of Kumar Sanu's case will be closely watched by legal professionals in the media, entertainment, and technology sectors. It has the potential to set a crucial precedent on several fronts: 1. AI and Deepfakes: The court's handling of the AI voice-cloning and face-morphing claims could establish clearer legal boundaries for the use of generative AI in creating content featuring public figures. 2. Scope of Moral Rights: The case will test the application of a performer's moral rights under the Copyright Act in the context of memes and "unsavoury humour," potentially delineating the line between fair use or parody and reputational harm. 3. Liability of Intermediaries: While not explicitly detailed, the plea's mention of revenue generation on social media platforms like YouTube and Instagram hints at the potential for future directions to these intermediaries to curb the monetization and dissemination of such infringing content.

As artists and public figures navigate a digital landscape fraught with new technological challenges, the Delhi High Court's decision in Kumar Sanu Bhattacharjee v. Jammable Limited & Ors. will likely serve as a vital guidepost in the evolving saga of protecting one's identity in the age of artificial intelligence.