Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan recently approached the Delhi High Court alleging misuse of their image and voice in AI-generated videos.
Background
- Personality rights refer to a person’s control over their name, photo, voice, likeness and public image.
- These rights protect dignity, privacy, and commercial value of identity.
- Generative AI and deepfakes now allow realistic manipulation of faces and voices, creating new risks for reputation, safety, and data misuse.
Why AI Has Complicated Personality Rights
- AI tools can create hyper-realistic fake videos, voices and images without consent.
- Such content can harm reputation, spread misinformation or be used for extortion.
- AI systems often train on large data sets that include personal images or voices without permission.
Constitutional Basis
- Personality rights flow from Article 21 (Right to Life and Privacy) as recognized in Puttaswamy judgment (2017).
Key Judicial Interventions
- Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Nagi (2022): Court recognized misuse of celebrity identity.
- Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life (2023): Court stopped AI use of actor’s image and catchphrase.
- Arijit Singh v. Codible Ventures (2024): Protection granted against AI-generated voice imitation.
Limitations
- No dedicated statute defining personality rights.
- Enforcement is weak due to anonymous online users, cross-border AI platforms, and slow takedown systems.
- IT Act 2000 and 2024 Intermediary Rules cover impersonation but lack clarity on AI-specific harms.
Global Frameworks
- United States: Uses the Right of Publicity, treated as a property right. Tennessee’s ELVIS Act (2024) bans unapproved AI cloning of voices and likenesses.
- European Union: GDPR mandates consent for processing personal or biometric data. EU AI Act (2024) classifies deepfakes as high-risk and requires clear labelling.
- China: Courts have recognised that synthetic voices cannot mislead consumers. Damages have been awarded where AI clones were used without consent.
Ethical and Governance Concerns
- AI blurs authenticity, making it harder to distinguish real from fake.
- Scholars emphasize that identity should not be commodified by AI models.
- UNESCO (2021) stresses dignity, transparency and human-centred AI design.
- Issues like AI imitation of deceased artists and absence of global standards remain unresolved.
Way Forward for India
- Enact a dedicated personality rights law defining name, image, likeness, voice and digital clones.
- Mandate AI watermarking, traceability and liability for platforms hosting deepfakes.
- Create standard timelines for takedown of false content.
- Strengthen cooperation with global digital regulators.
- Provide clear rules for AI training data and protect creators’ artistic and commercial interests.
Conclusion
India must urgently build a strong legal shield to protect identity in a world where AI can easily mimic people. Safeguarding dignity and reputation now requires clearer laws, shared global norms, and responsible technology use.
This topic is available in detail on our main website.
