Recently a lawsuit by Abhishek Bachchan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan against AI-generated deepfake videos on Google and YouTube reignited debate over personality rights, privacy, and AI misuse. 

What Are Personality Rights?

• Personality rights refer to the rights of an individual to control the use of their identity, including their name, image, likeness, voice, signature, and other distinctive personal attributes.
• Nature of the Right: 
  • These rights are personal and non-transferable, aimed at protecting a person’s dignity, privacy, and reputation.
  • They also include publicity rights, especially for celebrities, where identity has commercial value.
• Examples of Violation:
  • Unauthorized use of a celebrity’s photo in an advertisement.
  • Commercial merchandise bearing a person’s identity without permission.
• AI Threats:  Generative AI and deepfakes blur authenticity, enabling misinformation, extortion, reputational harm, and identity commodification.

India’s Legal Position on Personality Rights

• Absence of Legislation: India does not have a single dedicated law defining personality rights. These rights are protected through common law principles, Article 21 (Right to Privacy), and different intellectual property statutes.
  • Copyright Act, 1957: It grants performers exclusive rights, enabling them to control the reproduction of their performances and to oppose any distortion, modification, or misuse.
  • Trade Marks Act, 1999: Individuals can register unique elements of their persona such as names, signatures, voice styles, or catchphrases as trademarks.
• Regulatory Gaps: The IT Act, 2000 and 2024 Intermediary Guidelines address impersonation and deepfakes, but enforcement is weak due to anonymity, platform immunity, and cross-border data flow.
• Judicial Recognition: The Supreme Court, in several judgments, has held that AI-driven infringements constitute violations of the right to privacy. 
• Judicial Precedents:
• • Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Nagi (2022): Court ruled his voice and image cannot be used without consent, affirming direct protection for personality rights.
  • Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India (2023): Use of an AI-generated catchphrase “Jhakaas” was prohibited, recognising the link between personality and brand value.
  • Arijit Singh v. Codible Ventures LLP (2024): Court barred a company from cloning his voice using AI, establishing voice as an essential component of personality rights.

Check Out UPSC CSE Books

Visit PW Store

Global Approaches to Personality Rights

• United States (Property-Based Model): The U.S. treats ‘Right of publicity’ as a transferable property right (e.g., Haelan Laboratories v. Topps, 1953).
  • Ensuring Likeness, Voice, and Image Security Act (ELVIS) 2024: The act bans AI misuse of voices/likenesses.
• European Union: General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (2016): The Regulation treats personal and biometric data as dignity-based rights, requiring explicit and informed consent for processing personal/biometric data.
  • EU AI Act (2024): The Act identifies deepfake technologies as high-risk systems and imposes mandatory rules for disclosure, transparency, and labelling of all synthetic content.
• China: China follows a strict, state-controlled regulatory approach to generative AI and synthetic content, ensuring tight supervision and enforcement.
  • Beijing Internet Court Ruling (2024): The court held that synthetic voices must not mislead or deceive consumers.

DOWNLOAD PDF