Granting singer Arijit Singh relief, the Bombay high court said that AI tools generating content using a celebrity’s voice, image or other attributes without consent, violate his “personality rights”. Celebrities are particularly vulnerable to unauthorised generation of content through Artificial Intelligence tools, the court added.
Hearing Arijit Singh’s petition, Justice R.I. Chagla, in his interim order on July 26, restrained eight online platforms from using his “personality rights” and directed them to remove all such content and also voice conversion tools.
The singer had moved the court claiming that these platforms provided AI tools to synthesise artificial sound recordings by mimicking his voice, mannerisms and other attributes. Arijit has consciously refrained from any kind of brand endorsement or gross commercialisation of his personality traits for the past several years, his lawyer, Hiren Kamod, said.
Agreeing that Singh deserved interim relief, the court remarked, “What shocks the conscience of this court is the manner in which celebrities, particularly performers as the present plaintiff, are vulnerable to being targeted by unauthorised generative AI content.” Elaborating, the judge added that the freedom of speech and expression allowed for critique and commentary but did not grant the licence to exploit a celebrity’s persona for commercial gain. Justice Chagla said, “Making available AI tools that enable the conversion of any voice into that of a celebrity without his/her permission, constitutes a violation of the celebrity’s personality rights.” Such tools facilitate “unauthorised appropriation and manipulation” of a celebrity’s voice, a key component of their personal identity, he added. Further, such use of AI technology also undermines celebrities’ ability to prevent “deceptive uses of their identity”, the court explained.
“Prima facie, I am of the view that the plaintiff’s personality traits including his name, voice, photograph/caricature, image, likeness, persona and other attributes of his personality are protectable elements of his personality rights,” Justice Chagla said.
