The Delhi High Court today has indicated that it will pass an order on the interim relief sought by the founder of BoAt, Aman Gupta, in a personality rights suit alleging unauthorised use of his name, image, trademarks and likeness across AI chatbots, deepfake videos, fake endorsements, merchandise and impersonation accounts online.
Appearing before the Court for the plaintiff, Senior Advocate Diya Kapur submitted that several event booking platforms were falsely claiming they could arrange his appearance by paying money, while multiple online advertisements and commercial endorsements were being circulated without his consent. It was also argued that AI chatbots operating under names such as “Bot Aman Gupta” purported to provide startup and investment advice by impersonating him.
“They purport to be my chatbots. They are AI chatbots which purport to be advice given by me,” she submitted, adding that users could ask such bots questions like whether a startup would receive funding.
The Court was further shown AI-generated and allegedly vulgar videos using Gupta’s likeness, including manipulated clips resembling content from Shark Tank India. She argued that some videos portrayed Aman Gupta in a derogatory manner and commercially exploited both his personality rights and registered trademarks- “Hum Bhi Bana Lenge”. “They are commercialising it because they make money on these GIFs,” the Court was told.
Appearing for X, Advocate Varun Pathak, defended against sweeping takedown directions affecting memes, criticism or innocuous online content involving public figures. It was submitted that “Unauthorised use that’s fine. Something which is vulgar that’s also fine. But normal criticism or just use of a picture or fair comment, all those things should not be taken down.”
Justice Tushar Rao Gedela agreed to it, noting that “all content need not be taken down, public figures would naturally attract differing opinions online.”
The Court also discussed directions for disclosure of basic subscriber information and IP logs in respect of identified URLs and indicated that platforms may raise objections regarding specific content if they believe it falls outside the scope of unlawful impersonation or commercial misuse.
The Court has reserved the order while clarifying that if platforms had objections to specific content, they could either convey those objections to the plaintiff or move an appropriate application before the Court.
Appearances
For Plaintiff- Senior Advocate Diya Kapur and Advocate Nakul Gandhi
For Respondents– Advocate Varun Pathak