Cinema VinesThe Delhi High Court today granted an ex‑parte interim injunction to protect Bollywood actress Tabu from the unauthorized use of her name, image, voice, photographs and other personality attributes, including through artificial intelligence, deepfakes, face morphing and other digital technologies. The order, delivered by Justice Jyoti Singh, requires major digital platforms such as Google, Meta, X and Reddit to remove or disable access to a large number of URLs that allegedly carry objectionable content involving Tabu. The court also directed certain platforms and domain service providers to disclose basic subscriber information and IP log details connected with the accounts or content in question.
Tabu’s petition sought protection of her personality and publicity rights after she alleged that her identity was being commercially exploited online through fake event‑booking accounts, unauthorized merchandise, fabricated statements and AI‑generated or manipulated obscene material. The court noted that Tabu’s name and stage name, along with her image, voice and likeness, have acquired unique distinctiveness and are instantly associated with her by the public. Justice Singh held that Tabu had made out a prima facie case for an ex‑parte ad‑interim injunction and that the balance of convenience lay in her favour, finding that she was likely to suffer irreparable harm if interim protection was not granted.
The court referenced earlier Delhi High Court decisions that recognise and protect personality rights, including cases such as D.M. Entertainment v. Baby Gift House, Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India and Jaikishan Kakubhai Saraf v. Peppy Store. It stated that unauthorized use of a famous person’s name, image or other distinctive attributes for commercial purposes can amount to infringement, dilute the individual’s unique identity and result in unearned commercial gain by third parties.
A key aspect of the case was Tabu’s allegation that AI‑generated obscene images, videos and GIFs were being circulated online by manipulating excerpts from her films, interviews and public appearances. According to the plaint, some movie scenes had allegedly been edited, slowed down or zoomed in to focus on intimate portions and were then circulated online to attract viewers and generate revenue. The court observed that uploading and disseminating AI‑generated videos containing deliberately edited content from movies, public appearances or interviews, with the objective of sensationalising the material and diverting traffic for monetary gains, was causing irreparable harm to Tabu’s goodwill, reputation and commercial value.
