Protecting Celebrity Personas

Introduction 

The Bombay High Court has recently taken significant steps to protect the personality rights of prominent celebrities including veteran singer Asha Bhosle, Bollywood actor Suniel Shetty, and singer Arijit Singh. These landmark rulings come at a time when artificial intelligence platforms and social media have made it increasingly easy to exploit celebrity identities without consent. While personality rights remain uncodified in Indian statutes, courts have consistently upheld them by invoking constitutional rights to privacy and property, establishing crucial precedents for protecting individual personas in the digital age. 

What are Personality Rights? 

• Personality rights encompass distinctive attributes of celebrities that make them identifiable to the public, including their name, voice, signature, image, and other recognizable features. 
• These rights extend to unique characteristics such as specific phrases, mannerisms, poses, or any other trait strongly associated with the individual's public persona. 
• Courts have established that only the creators or owners of such distinctive features possess the right to use them for commercial purposes. 
• Any unauthorized exploitation of these personality traits by third parties without the celebrity's explicit consent or authorization constitutes an infringement of their personality rights. 

What were the Current Issues Before the Bombay High Court? 

• Asha Bhosle approached the court seeking protection of her name, voice, signatures, and images from unauthorized commercial or personal use, alleging violations of her moral rights under the Copyright Act by AI platforms and unknown entities. 
• Suniel Shetty's complaint centered on AI-generated images and counterfeit merchandise that misappropriated his likeness, along with fake brand endorsements and deepfake pictures showing fabricated scenarios that caused irreparable damage to his reputation and existing contracts. 
• Arijit Singh's 2024 petition highlighted how AI platforms were converting text, speech, and audio files into AI-generated versions of his voice using sophisticated algorithms to replicate his personality traits without authorization. 

What were the Bombay High Court's Observations? 

• Justice Riyaz I Chagla expressed serious concern in July 2024 about how celebrities have become vulnerable to unauthorized generative AI content, noting that such platforms were capitalizing on the popularity and reputation of celebrities while facilitating potential abuse of their personality rights. 
• Justice Arif S Doctor ruled that making AI tools available to convert any voice into that of a celebrity without permission constitutes a clear violation of personality rights, as these tools enable unauthorized appropriation and manipulation of a celebrity's voice, which forms a key component of their personal identity. 
• The court emphasized that technological exploitation not only infringes upon an individual's right to control their own likeness and voice but also undermines their ability to prevent commercial and deceptive uses of their identity. 
• Unauthorized AI-generated content constitutes a blatant invasion of privacy and fundamental rights, with deepfake images representing grave infringement of personality rights and the right to live with dignity. 

How Have Other High Courts Ruled on Personality Rights? 

• The Delhi High Court granted protection to Amitabh Bachchan's distinctive baritone voice and restrained unauthorized use of his catchphrases from Kaun Banega Crorepati, including "Computer ji and lock kiya jaye," as well as variations of his name like "Big B." 
• Anil Kapoor received relief for protecting his persona including the popular catchphrase "jhakkas" that he popularized in movies, demonstrating courts' recognition of unique verbal trademarks. 
• Jackie Shroff's personality rights were protected with reference to his trademark registered term 'Bhidu,' establishing precedent for protecting colloquial identifiers. 
• The Delhi High Court granted similar protections to Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan against websites and online marketplaces selling unauthorized merchandise, emphasizing that courts cannot ignore such exploitation. 
• The Madras High Court, in a 2015 case involving actor Rajinikanth, established that personality rights vest in persons who have attained celebrity status, setting an important precedent for protecting celebrity personas. 

What are the Legal Provisions Related to Personality Rights Under the Copyright Act? 

• Section 38 of the Copyright Act, 1957 grants performers special rights known as "performer's rights" when they appear or engage in any performance, with these rights subsisting for fifty years from the beginning of the calendar year following the performance. 
• Section 38A provides performers with exclusive rights to make sound or visual recordings of their performance, reproduce them in any material form, and store them in any medium by electronic or other means. 
• Performers have the exclusive right to issue copies of the performance to the public (excluding copies already in circulation), communicate the performance to the public, and sell or commercially rent recordings. 
• Performers retain the right to broadcast or communicate their performances to the public, except where such performances have already been broadcast. 
• Performers who consent to inclusion in cinematograph films retain entitlement to royalties for commercial use of their performances unless contractually specified otherwise. 
• Section 38B grants moral rights allowing performers to claim identification as the performer and to restrain or claim damages for any distortion, mutilation, or modification of their performance that would be prejudicial to their reputation. 

Conclusion 

The protection of personality rights has emerged as a critical legal issue in India's rapidly evolving digital landscape, particularly with the proliferation of AI-generated content and deepfakes. Indian courts have demonstrated a progressive approach by recognizing and safeguarding these rights despite the absence of specific statutory provisions, drawing instead upon constitutional rights to privacy, property rights, and existing copyright law protections. As technology continues to advance, these judicial precedents establish essential frameworks for balancing innovation with individual rights, ensuring that celebrities and public figures retain control over their identities and personas in an increasingly complex digital environment.