Delhi HC restrains various entities from using actor Jackie Shroff’s name, voice, image without permission
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has restrained various entities from using actor Jackie Shroff’s personality and publicity rights by utilizing, exploiting, and misappropriating his name and other sobriquets including “Jackie Jaggu dada”, “jaggu dada” his voice and his image for any commercial purpose without his consent and authorization, saying that the actor is a celebrity and this status inherently grants him certain rights over his personality and associated attributes.
High Court restrained various entities in an interim order
Justice Sanjeev Narula, in an interim order, restrained several entities from infringing Shorff’s personality and publicity rights by distorting videos of Shroff which tarnishes his reputation and violates his moral rights for any commercial purpose, without his consent and authorization.
The High Court said that the entities selling wallpapers, T-shirts and posters, etc. on e-commerce platforms and operating an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot platform were prima facie acting in violation of Shroff’s personality and publicity rights by exploiting and misappropriating his attributes.
Shroff moved High Court seeking to protect his personality, publicity rights
The High Court’s interim order came on a plea filed by Shroff seeking to protect his own name, image, likeness, persona, voice and various other distinctive attributes of his personality against unauthorised and misuse over the internet.
The High Court also restrained defendants from commercially using an unlicensed Artificial Intelligence chatbot that uses attributes of Shroff’s persona without Shroff’s consent and/or authorization, including on formats and mediums like the Artificial Intelligence.
The High Court also directed the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to issue necessary directions to the telecom service providers and internet service providers to the block the infringing URLs/ links Shroff mentioned in the petition.
The High Court also passed the direction against two content creators who published videos of the actor with “extremely profane words and abuses”.
High Court issued notice to certain other entities, including a YouTube content creator
The High Court issued notice to certain other entities with respect to alleged violation of Shroff’s rights, including a YouTube content creator hosting an allegedly derogatory video and a restaurant owner using the registered trademark “Bhidu” for his outlet.
Would like to hear YouTube content creator before passing any order: High Court
Regarding the allegedly derogatory video, the High Court said that Shroff’s portrayal did not introduce any falsehoods and rather, it embellished his existing public perception as being formidable and it would therefore like to hear the YouTube content creator before passing any order.
The High Court noted that the video in question has garnered substantial viewership on YouTube, underscoring its popularity as a humorous rendition of Shroff’s interviews.
“The format, akin to a meme, spoof, or parody, is part of a burgeoning comedic genre that leverages the cultural resonance of public figures to create engaging content. YouTubers are a growing community, and the substantial viewership of these videos translate into significant revenue for the creators, underscoring that such content is not merely entertainment but also a vital source of livelihood for a considerable segment, particularly, the youth,” the High Court said and added, “These videos represent a form of artistic expression that requires creators to engage thoughtfully with their content.”
The High Court further said, “This creative process can be seen as generating not only economic value but also employment opportunities for a significant number of young individuals. Restricting such creative expressions by enjoining Defendant No. 5 from producing similar videos or blocking these videos might have far-reaching consequences for this vibrant community. More critically, it could set a precedent that stifles freedom of expression, potentially deterring the public from exercising their right to free speech due to fear of legal repercussions.”
High Court earlier issued summons to several entities
The High Court earlier had issued summons to several entities on Shroff’s plea for allegedly misusing the name and personality attributes of actor for commercial gain without his permission.
What did Shroff submit before the High Court?
Shroff told the High Court that he is one of the most celebrated, acclaimed and successful actors in the Indian film industry and he has extensive appearance in over 220 films, multiple television shows and web series. He further said that he has endorsed a large variety of products and services and has appeared in several advertisements as well and claimed ownership of Marathi Slang “Bhidu”, which means ‘a close friend’, and asserted statutory rights over the Marathi Slang “Bhidu”.
Shroff submitted that the alleged activities of some of the defendants have resulted in commercial benefits through the unauthorized exploitation of his personality and they utilized his name, image, voice, and other unique characteristics without permission, thereby infringing on his personality and publicity rights.
Shroff, in support of his plea, relied on the judgements passed by the coordinate bench of the High Court protecting personality rights of actors Amitabh Bachchan and Anil Kapoor.
The matter would be further heard on October 15.