Summary
In the case of Aishwarya Rai Bachchan vs Aishwaryaworld.Com, the Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte interim injunction restraining multiple parties from misusing the celebrity's personality traits including her name, image, and likeness. As per the Court, the unauthorised commercial and digital use of her persona, including deepfakes and AI-generated content, amounts to violation of personality rights and passing off.
Background
Personality Rights Infringement and AI Misuse The Plaintiff, Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, filed a commercial suit alleging unauthorised use of her name, image, and persona by multiple defendants. She claimed that the misuse included websites falsely claiming to be official platforms, sale of merchandise with her images, AI chatbots generating impersonated responses, and deepfake videos shared on YouTube. The Plaintiff sought urgent reliefs including injunctions and take-down orders to prevent further damage to her reputation and goodwill.
Questions Before the Court
- Whether the unauthorised use of the Plaintiff’s name, image, likeness, and other traits violates her personality rights?
- Whether creation and dissemination of AI-generated deepfakes impersonating the Plaintiff amounts to infringement and passing off?
- Whether the use of the Plaintiff’s persona for commercial gain without consent is impermissible in law?
- Whether online platforms hosting infringing content can be directed to take it down and share user details?
- Whether an ex-parte interim injunction is warranted against known and unknown parties (John Does)?
Arguments Presented By the Parties
Plaintiff
- The Plaintiff is a globally recognised personality with goodwill associated with her name and endorsements.
- Her identity, including name, image, likeness, voice, and persona, has distinctiveness and commercial value.
- Defendants have used her persona without consent for misleading websites, merchandise, and digital content including AI deepfakes.
- The misuse causes confusion, misrepresentation, and damages her reputation and endorsement value.
- The acts also infringe her performer’s rights, moral rights, and amount to passing off.
Court’s Analysis
Publicity and Personality Rights Infringement The court stated that the Plaintiff’s persona has distinctiveness and commercial value due to her international fame and endorsements. According to the court, unauthorised use of such attributes can lead to confusion and misrepresentation, thereby constituting violation of personality rights.
Use of AI and Deepfake Technology
The court observed that several defendants had used AI tools to generate fake and obscene content impersonating the Plaintiff. According to the court, such content not only caused reputational harm but also violated the Plaintiff’s moral rights and dignity.
Online Platform Liability
In the eyes of the court, platforms like Defendant No. 5 (e-commerce) and Defendant No. 10 (YouTube/Google) are required to take down infringing content and share user details. The court directed them to act on notices from the Plaintiff within a fixed time.
John Doe Orders
As per the court, injunctions can be issued even against unknown defendants when their identity is not ascertainable at the time of filing but they are engaged in infringing acts.
Grounds for Interim Injunction
The court held that the Plaintiff had made out a prima facie case. According to the court, balance of convenience lay in favour of the Plaintiff, and irreparable harm would occur if relief was not granted.
Findings
The court passed the following interim orders:
- Restrained Defendants 1 to 9 and 13 from using the Plaintiff’s name, image, likeness, or any part of her persona in any format or medium, including AI-generated content.
- Restrained the sale of merchandise using the Plaintiff’s persona.
- Directed platforms to remove identified infringing URLs within 72 hours of notice and provide user details in a sealed cover within 7 days.
- Directed Government Defendants to assist in blocking offending URLs.
Relevant Paras
Para 34: “Personality Rights of individuals, simply put, entail the right to control and protect the exploitation of one’s image, name, likeness or other attributes of the individuals’ personality…”
Para 36: “…the attributes of the Plaintiff’s persona, including her name and images, are being misused…by employing technological tools, including Artificial Intelligence…”
Para 38: “…if an injunction is not granted in the present case, it will lead to an irreparable loss / harm to the Plaintiff and her family, not only financially, but also with respect to her right to live with dignity.”
Para 39(i): “…Defendants are restrained from violating the Plaintiff’s Personality / Publicity Rights and / or Passing Off their goods and services…”
Case Citation
Aishwarya Rai Bachchan vs Aishwaryaworld.Com & Ors., CS(COMM) 956/2025, decided on 9 September 2025.
Indian Kanoon: http://indiankanoon.org/doc/192177197/ (visited on 14 September 2025)
Disclaimer
This case blog is based on the author’s understanding of the judgment. Understandings and opinions of others may differ. An AI application was used to generate parts of this case blog. Views are personal.
