How Are Courts Protecting Personality Rights in India?

How Are Courts Protecting Personality Rights in India?

Why in News?

In recent weeks, the Delhi High Court has issued a series of important orders protecting the personality rights of Bollywood celebrities from unauthorised commercial exploitation, especially through AI-generated content. These include restraining the misuse of names, voices, images, and likenesses of actors like Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan, Anil Kapoor, Amitabh Bachchan, and Jackie Shroff. The move signals a broader judicial recognition of personality rights in the digital era—an age when AI, deepfakes, and virtual clones threaten the very identity of individuals.

Introduction

Personality rights—sometimes referred to as publicity rights—safeguard an individual’s control over the commercial use of their name, likeness, image, voice, signature, and other distinctive traits. Traditionally, these rights were most relevant to public figures such as celebrities, athletes, and politicians, whose persona carried economic value.

However, the AI revolution has changed the stakes. With generative AI tools capable of creating realistic imitations of a person’s face, voice, or mannerisms, courts have had to step in urgently to regulate misuse.

The judiciary’s proactive intervention shows both the strengths and challenges of personality rights—how to protect individuals from misappropriation without unduly curbing freedom of expression.

What Are Personality Rights?

Personality rights are a bundle of rights that protect:

1. Name and Likeness: Preventing the unauthorised use of a person’s name or visual image.

2. Voice and Signature: Protecting distinct traits like voice imitation or forged signatures.

3. Publicity Rights: Granting an individual the right to commercialise their identity and prevent others from exploiting it.

These rights flow from several legal instruments in India:

• Copyright Act, 1957: Section 38 and Section 38A provide exclusive rights for performers. Section 57 safeguards moral rights.

• Trade Marks Act, 1999: Prohibits unauthorised commercial use of distinctive attributes like names, likenesses, and signatures.

• Common Law of Passing Off: Prevents deceptive endorsements that mislead consumers.

• Judicial Precedent: Courts have consistently recognised personality rights under the broad umbrella of the right to privacy and dignity.

Recent Court Orders: Bollywood in Focus

The latest judicial wave was triggered when actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan approached the Delhi High Court, flagging the misuse of their images and voices in AI-generated content and merchandise.

• On September 3, 2024, Justice Tejasi Karia granted relief to the couple, restraining platforms from using their personas without permission.

• Justice Pratibha M. Singh extended similar protection to Anil Kapoor, who sought to prevent misuse of his famous catchphrases, gestures, and likeness.

• Earlier, Amitabh Bachchan and Jackie Shroff had also secured broad injunctions against unauthorised exploitation of their persona.

These interventions are significant because they signal a wider push for digital-era personality rights.

Why Are Courts Stepping In?

The courts’ actions are motivated by three key concerns:

1. Consumer Deception: Misuse of a celebrity’s likeness can mislead fans into believing endorsements are genuine.

2. Economic Exploitation: A celebrity’s identity carries commercial value; unauthorised use dilutes this market.

3. Privacy and Dignity: Identity misuse—whether by AI chatbots, deepfakes, or fake endorsements—violates personal autonomy.

The judiciary has repeatedly stressed that personality rights are not limited to privacy but also protect the commercial equity built by public figures.

Case Studies and Judicial Reasoning

1. Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Nagi (2022)

The Delhi High Court restrained several platforms from using the actor’s voice, name, and likeness for lotteries and games. The court emphasised that unauthorised use not only violated privacy but also damaged the reputation and goodwill painstakingly built over decades.

2. Anil Kapoor v. Various Platforms (2023)

The court banned misuse of the actor’s iconic catchphrases (“jhakaas”), gestures, and images. It held that digital misuse could mislead audiences and unfairly exploit the actor’s identity.

3. Arun Jaitley’s Case (2019)

The late politician’s family secured protection of his persona from misuse in advertisements. The judgment reaffirmed that public figures retain posthumous publicity rights.

4. Rajnikanth’s Personality Rights Case

The Madras High Court held that unauthorised use of the superstar’s name and likeness in a film title violated his personality rights.

These cases underline the judiciary’s willingness to expand the doctrine to meet digital challenges.

The AI Dimension: A New Frontier

Generative AI has drastically changed the landscape:

• Deepfake Videos: Celebrities’ faces are mapped onto different contexts, sometimes pornographic, tarnishing reputations.

• Voice Cloning: AI-generated voice models reproduce a person’s speech patterns for scams or fake endorsements.

• Chatbots: Virtual avatars mimic celebrities for commercial use without consent.

The Delhi High Court, in its recent orders, specifically targeted AI-generated misuse, noting that such activities not only infringe personality rights but also risk consumer trust in digital platforms.

Balancing Personality Rights and Free Speech

While protecting celebrities is important, the courts also face the challenge of avoiding overbreadth.

• Critics argue that broad injunctions could suppress parody, satire, and legitimate artistic expression.

• Courts have responded by clarifying that fair use exceptions remain intact: reporting, criticism, academic discussion, and parody are not infringements.

• However, purely commercial exploitation without consent is strictly prohibited.

The judiciary thus attempts to strike a balance: protect identity without silencing creativity.

International Perspective

Globally, personality rights have long been recognised:

• United States: Publicity rights protect against unauthorised commercial use of name, image, or likeness. The landmark case Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. affirmed this principle.

• European Union: Courts balance personality rights with free speech under the European Convention on Human Rights.

• Japan & South Korea: Strong protections exist against unauthorised celebrity endorsements.

India is now catching up by creating a hybrid model, drawing from both privacy law and intellectual property doctrines.

Challenges Ahead

Despite progress, several issues remain unresolved:

1. Lack of a Comprehensive Law: Personality rights are currently enforced through fragmented statutes and judicial precedents.

2. Enforcement Difficulties: Tracking and stopping AI-generated misuse across global platforms is extremely challenging.

3. Posthumous Rights: Courts have sometimes extended personality rights beyond death, but the scope remains ambiguous.

4. Balancing Free Speech: Overly expansive injunctions could chill creative expression.

Way Forward

Experts like Javella Balaji (Centre for Legal Policy) argue for a comprehensive legislative framework that:

• Clearly defines personality rights and their duration.

• Provides statutory remedies against AI misuse.

• Establishes liability for platforms hosting unauthorised content.

• Balances rights with constitutional free speech protections.

Such a law would reduce dependence on case-by-case judicial interpretation and provide clarity for both celebrities and platforms.

Conclusion

The rise of AI has brought personality rights into the legal spotlight like never before. Courts in India are increasingly proactive in shielding celebrities from unauthorised exploitation of their persona, signalling that identity is no longer just a matter of privacy but also of economic value and dignity.

However, without a comprehensive legislative framework, the judiciary’s piecemeal interventions risk inconsistency. India must now move towards a codified law on personality rights, balancing protection with free expression in the digital age.

Q&A Section

Q1. What are personality rights?
A1. Personality rights safeguard an individual’s control over their name, likeness, voice, signature, image, and other distinctive traits from unauthorised commercial exploitation.

Q2. Which legal provisions in India currently protect personality rights?
A2. The Copyright Act, 1957 (Sections 38, 38A, 57), Trade Marks Act, 1999, common law of passing off, and constitutional right to privacy.

Q3. Why have Bollywood actors recently approached the courts?
A3. To restrain AI platforms and other entities from misusing their images, voices, and likenesses in deepfakes, merchandise, and advertisements without consent.

Q4. How do courts balance personality rights with free speech?
A4. By allowing fair use exceptions such as satire, parody, criticism, reporting, and academic work while banning commercial exploitation without consent.

Q5. What is the need of the hour for India regarding personality rights?
A5. A comprehensive legislative framework defining scope, duration, and remedies—especially for AI misuse—while balancing free speech protections.