Context:
Recently, the Bombay High Court granted interim relief to actor Shilpa Shetty, restraining social media platforms and AI-linked entities from posting manipulated or morphed images and videos. Similarly, the Delhi High Court barred the unauthorised commercial use of actor R. Madhavan’s image, ordering the takedown of AI-generated material and prohibiting the sale of merchandise using his likeness.
-
- These cases reflect a growing trend of celebrities, including Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan, seeking judicial intervention against the misuse of their names, images, and likenesses on social media under the framework of personality rights.
- These cases reflect a growing trend of celebrities, including Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan, seeking judicial intervention against the misuse of their names, images, and likenesses on social media under the framework of personality rights.
About Personality Rights in India:
Definition
Personality rights enable individuals to control the use of personal attributes such as name, image, voice, likeness, and distinctive expressions or traits. These rights cover both commercial and non-commercial exploitation.
Legal Status in India:
-
-
- Personality rights are not explicitly codified in Indian statutes.
- They are protected indirectly through existing laws and constitutional provisions.
- Personality rights are not explicitly codified in Indian statutes.
-
Key Components:
1. Right to Publicity
o Prevents unauthorised commercial exploitation of an individual’s image or likeness.
o Partially governed by the Trademarks Act, 1999 and the Copyright Act, 1957.
2. Right to Privacy
o Protects individuals from public representation without consent.
o Anchored under Article 21 of the Constitution, as affirmed in the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) judgment (2017).
Posthumous Personality Rights:
-
- India does not provide explicit statutory recognition for posthumous personality rights.
- The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 prohibits the commercial use of images of Mahatma Gandhi and the Prime Minister.
- In Deepa Jayakumar v. AL Vijay (2019), the Madras High Court held that personality rights generally cease upon a person’s death.
- India does not provide explicit statutory recognition for posthumous personality rights.
Key Judicial Precedents:
-
- ICC Development Ltd. v. Arvee Enterprises (2003), Delhi HC
Deprivation of publicity rights was held to violate Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. - Arun Jaitley v. Network Solutions (2011), Delhi HC
The Court recognised that fame and reputation in the digital space carry the same legal weight as in the physical world. - Rajinikanth v. Varsha Productions (2015), Madras HC
Unauthorised use of a celebrity’s name or image was held to infringe personality rights.
- ICC Development Ltd. v. Arvee Enterprises (2003), Delhi HC
Significance of the High Court Orders:
1. Digital Privacy Protection: Reinforces the relevance of personality rights in the era of AI-generated content and deepfakes.
2. Preventive Judicial Intervention: Courts are increasingly issuing anticipatory and real-time injunctions to prevent irreversible reputational harm.
3. Technology Accountability: Emphasises that AI must be used responsibly and within constitutional and legal boundaries.
Conclusion:
The interim relief granted to Shilpa Shetty, along with similar orders by the Delhi High Court, reflects a strong judicial commitment to protecting digital personhood. These developments mark an important evolution in the enforcement of personality rights in India, particularly in response to the growing challenges posed by AI-driven manipulation and misuse.
