Delhi High Court Restrains AI Deepfakes and Unauthorised Merchandise Misusing Vijay Deverakonda's Personality Rights
The Delhi High Court has issued an interim injunction order protecting actor Vijay Deverakonda's personality rights against unauthorized commercial exploitation, artificial intelligence deepfakes, and obscene content. Justice Vikas Mahajan directed major social media platforms, search engines, and domain registrars to disable infringing material and suspend fraudulent accounts and websites misusing the actor's identity.
The Delhi High Court's personality rights architecture is anchored in precedents including Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India (2023) and Jackie Shroff v. The Peppy Store (2024), which prohibited AI-generated deepfakes and unauthorized digital persona exploitation.
The Delhi High Court ordered MeitY and DoT to direct service providers to block listed infringing websites within 72 hours and mandated concerned entities to submit compliance affidavits within two weeks.
The judicial intervention follows a civil lawsuit filed by Deverakonda against multiple entities, online intermediaries, and unidentified persons described as John Does. The legal action cited rampant misuse of his name, initials, voice recordings, signatures, fashion style, photographs, movie stills, and live performances through generative artificial intelligence, machine learning, deepfakes, and face-morphing techniques. The actor alleged that rogue profiles and websites were falsely suggesting commercial endorsements or associations while circulating abusive and derogatory media.
Platform Mandates and Enforcement Timelines
The bench ruled that a celebrity's public stature inherently secures proprietary rights over associated personal attributes, granting exclusive authority to control commercial exploitation and brand value. The Court observed that protection extends robustly against vulgar, profane, or abusive content capable of damaging an artist's reputation and goodwill, stating that the apprehension of reputational injury appeared real and present.
Under the interim directives, intermediaries including Meta platforms, Google LLC, and X must permanently remove or disable access to identified infringing videos, reels, posts, and channels. Additionally, online marketplaces are mandated to take down specific URLs within 72 hours of receiving formal service of the order, while domain name registrars must lock and suspend designated rogue domains within the same 72-hour window.
Boundaries on the Rowdy Trademark Claim
While granting sweeping protections across digital attributes, the Court declined to issue an ex parte ad-interim injunction regarding the exclusive commercial use of the colloquial expression "Rowdy" under passing-off law. The bench noted that establishing distinctiveness and a secondary meaning exclusively attached to the actor requires substantive evidentiary proof beyond the initial hearing stage.
However, the judiciary clarified that deploying artificial intelligence generated or morphed imagery featuring Deverakonda alongside the term "Rowdy" constitutes a clear infringement of his personality rights. The matter has been listed for further proceedings on February 2, 2027.
What a personality-rights injunction does
The dispute illustrates how an actor's face, voice and recognisable identity can be commercially misused through synthetic images and unauthorised merchandise. An interim court order is designed to restrain specified conduct while proceedings continue; it does not automatically settle damages or every question about lawful parody, criticism and artistic expression. The exact defendants, uses and exceptions in the order matter. For readers encountering a suspicious promotion, the practical distinction is between material distributed through verified official channels and a clip or product merely borrowing a celebrity's likeness.