The Bombay High Court has granted veteran playback singer Asha Bhosle ad-interim protection of her personality and moral rights, preventing artificial intelligence (AI) platforms, online marketplaces, and sellers from unauthorizedly cloning her voice or commercially exploiting her image, likeness, and other attributes. Justice Arif S. Doctor stated that using a celebrity's personality traits without permission violates their publicity and personality rights. The court's decision emphasizes the growing legal concerns surrounding AI's impact on celebrity personality rights in India.
Bhosle approached the court against several defendants, including Mayk Inc, an AI company allegedly offering cloned versions of her voice, Amazon Seller Services Pvt Ltd, and Flipkart Internet Pvt Ltd, for displaying and selling posters and merchandise using her likeness without consent. Her petition also included an independent artist selling apparel with her image and Google LLC, as the operator of YouTube, where AI-generated videos imitating her voice had been uploaded.
The court has restrained the AI platforms and sellers from using, exploiting, or misappropriating Bhosle's name, voice, vocal style, technique, manner of singing, photograph, image, likeness, signature, persona, or any other attributes of her personality, for any commercial or personal gain. This includes the use of AI voice models, generative artificial intelligence, machine learning, or face morphing, without her written consent. The court also ordered these defendants to remove all infringing material, including cloned voice recordings, merchandise, and digital content, and to deliver up copies of such material for destruction.
Advocates representing Bhosle argued that her personality rights, including her name, voice, signature, and image, were being exploited for commercial and personal gain without consent. They also cited a violation of her moral rights as a performer under Section 38-B of the Copyright Act, 1957. An advocate appearing for Google LLC informed the court that the specific links annexed to the plaint would be taken down.
Justice Doctor observed that enabling the conversion of any voice into that of a celebrity without their permission would violate the celebrity's personality rights. He added that such tools facilitate the unauthorized appropriation and manipulation of a celebrity's voice, which is a key component of their personal identity and public persona. This exploitation infringes upon the individual's right to control and protect their own likeness and voice and undermines their ability to prevent commercial and deceptive uses of their identity.
Bhosle's petition emphasized that the misuse undermines her reputation and goodwill built over her career. The court observed that the balance of convenience lay entirely in Bhosle's favor. The absence of the defendants, despite having been served, supported Bhosle's claim that their conduct is unauthorized and infringing on her personality rights.
