Introduction: Identity as the new Intellectual Property
In December 2022, the Delhi High Court granted legendary actor Amitabh Bachchan an injunction restraining unauthorized use of his name, voice, likeness, and even his famous “KBC” catchphrase. In September 2023, actor Anil Kapoor obtained a similar injunction against the misuse of his persona—extending protection even to his iconic gestures like “jhakaas.”
By 2024–25, courts in India are increasingly being approached by celebrities, influencers, and cricketers seeking protection against AI-generated deepfakes, fake endorsements, and unauthorized merchandising. This trend reflects the growing recognition of Personality Rights—the right of an individual to control the commercial use of their identity, including name, image, voice, likeness, signature, and other distinctive attributes.
Unlike traditional intellectual property rights, personality rights are not yet codified in Indian law, leaving their recognition to judicial interpretation. In an era of digital marketing, AI, and globalized entertainment, safeguarding these rights is more relevant than ever.
How Personality Rights Differ from Traditional IP Laws:
- Copyright vs. Personality Rights: Copyright protects original works of authorship—books, music, films. Personality rights protect the individual whose identity may itself be used for commercial gain.
- Trademark vs. Personality Rights: Trademarks protect logos, brand names, or taglines. While celebrities may trademark their names (e.g., Sachin Tendulkar™), personality rights extend further to cover their voice, gestures, and likeness.
- Privacy vs. Personality Rights: Privacy laws prevent intrusion and misuse of personal data. Personality rights ensure individuals control the commercial exploitation of their persona.
Key distinction: Personality rights are not statutorily codified in India, unlike copyrights and trademarks. Their scope remains largely judge-made.
Legal Recognition in India:
- ICC Development (International) Ltd. vs. Arvee Enterprises (2003, Delhi HC): First articulation of personality rights in India.
- DM Entertainment vs. Baby Gift House (2003, Delhi HC): Protection granted to Daler Mehndi against imitation dolls.
- Titan Industries vs. Ramkumar Jewellers (2012, Delhi HC): Unauthorized use of Amitabh and Jaya Bachchan’s images was restrained.
- Rajnikanth vs. Varsha Productions (2015, Madras HC): The Actor’s unique style and persona were protected from unauthorized use in films.
- Amitabh Bachchan vs. Rajat Nagi (2022, Delhi HC): Injunction against misuse of Bachchan’s persona, catchphrases, and voice.
- Anil Kapoor vs. Simply Life India (2023, Delhi HC): Landmark recognition extending even to Kapoor’s gestures, voice, and “jhakaas” expression.
- 2024-25 Delhi High Court orders in cases involving Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan, Karan Johar & others: Interim injunctions granted to Bollywood actors and cricketers against AI-driven deepfakes, unauthorized NFTs, and online impersonations, showing courts’ proactive approach.
These cases are constitutionally grounded in Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty), which courts have expanded to include the right to dignity, identity, and reputation.
Why Personality Rights Matter in the Digital Era:
- Digital Economy: Endorsements and influencer campaigns thrive on individual identities. Misuse undermines trust and contracts.
- AI & Deepfakes: Synthetic media enables voice cloning and hyper-realistic impersonations, often used for scams, fake endorsements, or defamation.
- Commercial Value of Persona: Celebrities’ identities are monetized assets worth millions.
- Consumer Protection: Prevents misleading promotions and false associations, safeguarding market integrity.
Challenges & Grey Areas:
- Absence of Codified Law: India lacks a dedicated statute on personality rights.
- Scope for Non-Celebrities: Whether ordinary citizens enjoy enforceable rights remains unsettled.
- Overlap with Privacy, Defamation, and IP: Courts struggle to demarcate boundaries.
- Cross-Border Enforcement: Global misuse on digital platforms is difficult to tackle.
- Balancing with Free Speech: Satire, parody, and creative freedom must be preserved while restricting commercial exploitation.
Global Comparisons: U.S. & EU Approaches:
United States – The Right of Publicity
- In the U.S., the “Right of Publicity” is recognized at both state common law and statutory levels.
- Example: Haelan Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum (1953) coined the term, granting individuals control over the commercial use of their persona.
- Some states, like California and New York, have explicit statutes covering name, likeness, and even voice.
- High-profile cases:
- White v. Samsung (1992): TV host Vanna White won against a robot resembling her in an advertisement.
- Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores (2014): Michael Jordan successfully sued for unauthorized use of his identity in a congratulatory ad.
European Union – Image Rights & Data Protection:
- EU law protects identity through a combination of privacy rights (Article 8 ECHR), data protection (GDPR), and unfair competition laws.
- Countries like France and Germany have well-developed “image rights,” allowing individuals to control commercial use of their likeness.
- Example: French courts have long recognized the right of celebrities over their image, balancing it against freedom of expression.
Key Takeaway for India:
- The U.S. model is commercially focused, granting strong enforceable rights to individuals.
- The EU model is privacy-centric, linking identity protection to personal dignity and data rights.
- India currently relies on judicial interpretation under constitutional rights and tort law, but lacks a codified statute.
The Way Forward: Need for a Codified Indian Law
India should adopt a hybrid approach drawing from both U.S. and EU frameworks:
- Define personality rights clearly, covering name, image, likeness, gestures, voice, and digital avatars.
- Provide statutory remedies, including damages, injunctions, and penalties.
- Carve out exceptions for news reporting, parody, satire, and artistic works.
- Incorporate AI and deepfake regulations, ensuring that identity misuse via synthetic media is covered.
- Enable cross-border enforcement mechanisms through cooperation with global platforms.
Conclusion:
Identity today is as valuable as intellectual property. For celebrities, influencers, and even ordinary individuals, misuse of identity threatens dignity, reputation, and commercial value. While Indian courts have made significant progress in recognizing personality rights, the absence of a codified law leaves gaps.
By drawing lessons from the U.S. Right of Publicity and European image rights, India can craft a modern framework that balances free speech with protection against commercial exploitation.
In an age of AI and deepfakes, safeguarding personality rights is not just about protecting celebrities—it is about protecting the very essence of individual identity.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The content may not reflect the most current legal developments and is not guaranteed to be accurate, complete, or up-to-date. Readers should consult a qualified legal professional before taking any action based on the information provided. The authors and publishers disclaim any liability for any loss or damage incurred as a result of reliance on this article. This article does not create an attorney-client relationship.