The Role of Personality Rights in Indian Law: Lessons from Jackie Shroff's Legal Battle
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69971/tipr.1.2.2023.13Keywords:
commercial use, unauthorized exploitation , personal identity, indian law, digital media, AIAbstract
Current research examines the landmark judgment of Jaikishan Kakubhai Saraf alias Jackie Shroff v. The Peppy Store & Ors. indicating the importance of developing personality rights jurisprudence in India, especially in digital content. Personality rights include both publicity rights and privacy rights. Right to control the commercial use of one's identity, i.e. publicity rights, is important for protecting personalities from unauthorized exploitation of their persona (name, image, voice, etc.). The case highlights the unauthorized use of Shroff's image for commercial gain without his consent, raising significant questions about the scope and enforcement of personality rights in India. The Court's decision to protect actor Jackie Shroff's identity from unauthorized commercial exploitation marks a pivotal moment in legal precedents safeguarding the identity of personality, especially for celebrities. This case underscores the evolving landscape of legal protections in the digital age, emphasizing the importance of rec-ognizing and upholding personality rights amidst increasing unauthorized commercial use. As a result, it stands as a landmark decision, guiding the future of personality rights and reinforcing the legal safeguards necessary to personality identity in an increasingly digital world. By dissecting this case, the paper aims to explore the im-plications for the ongoing development of personality rights in India and the growing importance of safeguarding individual identity in the digital era. Also, the paper critically assesses the current legal framework, including statutory provisions and judicial precedents. It has been compared with international standards to detect loopholes and propose improvements, in the evolving regime of personality rights in the digital era.
References
Augustian, Agnes.2023. Protection of Personality Rights in India: Issues and Challenges. IPR Journal of Maharashtra National Law University Nagpur 1: 44-53. https://www.nlunagpur.ac.in/PDF/Publications/5-Current-Issue/4.%20PROTECTION%20OF%20PERSONALITY%20RIGHTS%20IN%20INDIA.pdf
Congressional Research Service. Artificial intelligence prompts renewed consideration of a federal right of publicity. Available online: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB11052 (accessed on 31 July 2024).
Daryl Lim.2024.Innovation and artists’ rights in the age of generative AI. Available online: https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2024/07/10/innovation-and-artists-rights-in-the-age-of-generative-ai/ (accessed on 31 July 2024).
Drinkwater, W. Woods. 2013. Personality beyond borders: the case for a federal right of publicity. Mississippi Sports Law Review 3:.
Durkin, Daniele.2024. The King is back (in the digital era), The ELVIS Act, generative AI, and right of publicity. Available online: https://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2024/06/04/the-king-is-back-in-the-digital-era-the-elvis-act-generative-ai-and-right-of-publicity/ (ac-cessed on 31 July 2024).
Fernandez, Cristina. 1998. The right of publicity on the internet. Marquette Sports Law Journal 8: 289-364. https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/sportslaw/vol8/iss2/7.
Hegel, G.W.F. 1971. Hegel’s Philosophy of Mind 382.
International Trademark Association (INTA). 1998.US Federal right of publicity. Available online: https://www.inta.org/wp-content/uploads/public-files/advocacy/board-resolutions/U.S.-Federal-Right-of-Publicity-03.03.1998.pdf (accessed on 31 July 2024).
Kaushal, Tejaswini. 2024. Synthetic singers and voice theft: BomHC protects Arijit Singh’s personality rights—Part I. Available online: https://spicyip.com/2024/08/synthetic-singers-and-voice-theft-bomhc-protects-arijit-singhs-personality-rights-part-i.html (accessed on 31 July 2024).
Koski, Reid M. 2024. Warhol, drake, and deepfakes: monetizing the right of publicity in the generative AI era. Georgia State University Law Re-view 40: 981-987. https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/gsulr/vol40/iss4/11 .
Pigna, Juliana. 2024.Lights! Camera! Artificial Intelligence! Resolving the problem of AI generated content created without an actor's consent. Se-ton Hall University eRepository. Available online: https://scholarship.shu.edu/student_scholarship/1486 (accessed on 31 July 2024).
Purcell, Rachel A. 2020.Is that really me?: Social networking and the right of publicity. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 12: 611-619. https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw/vol12/iss3/5.
Rota, Dominic, and Scott Douglass. 2024.Reconsidering the right of publicity in the world of generative AI. Available online: https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/07/11/reconsidering-right-publicity-world-generative-ai/id=178745/ (accessed on 31 July 2024).
Rothman, Jennifer E. 2023. Artificial intelligence, copyright, and right of publicity. https://rightofpublicityroadmap.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Prof-Rothman-Comments-to-Copyright-Office-on-Right-of-Publicity-and-AI_October-2023.pdf (accessed on 31 July 2024).
Sesek, Kristina M. 2011.Twitter or Tweeter: Who should be liable for a right of publicity violation under the CDA? Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review 15: 237-249.
Tyagi, Kalpana. 2022. Deepfakes, copyright & personality rights: an inter-disciplinary perspective Available online: .https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359711219_Deepfakes_Copyright_Personality_Rights_An_inter-disciplinary_perspective (ac-cessed on 31 July 2024).
Verbeke, Cameron.2020. The right of publicity's place in intellectual property law. Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property Blog https://studentorgs.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjip/the-right-of-publicitys-place-in-intellectual-property-law/ (accessed on 31 July 2024).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.