This article is written by Aksh Pandey, IAMR Law College, 3rd year 6th Sem LLB student during his internship at LeDroit India.
Abstract
In the digital era, the commodification of celebrity identity has sparked significant legal discourse in India surrounding personality or image rights. These rights, which encompass control over the commercial use of an individual’s name, image, likeness, and voice, are increasingly recognized as valuable intellectual property globally. However, India lacks a dedicated statutory framework, relying instead on judicial interpretation of constitutional provisions, tort law, and intellectual property statutes. This article examines the evolving jurisprudence on celebrity image rights in India, key judicial pronouncements, and comparative international approaches. It critically analyzes whether personality can be treated as property, addressing issues of alienability, inheritance, and state regulation. Emerging challenges, including digital cloning, deepfakes, and posthumous rights, are discussed, alongside the urgent need for comprehensive legislation. The article concludes that while Indian courts have laid the groundwork for recognizing personality rights as quasi-proprietary, coherent statutory backing is essential to balance commercial exploitation, individual dignity, and freedom of expression in the modern media landscape.
Introduction
In the contemporary digital age, the boundaries between public and private personas are increasingly blurred. The commercialization of a person’s identity, especially that of celebrities, has led to a new wave of legal discourse in India—namely, the recognition and protection of image rights or personality rights. With the rise of media, advertising, and social platforms, a celebrity’s face, name, likeness, and voice have transformed into valuable intellectual assets. But this legal arena is still in its nascent stage in India. The central question that arises in this context is: Can personality be treated as property?
This article delves deep into the concept of celebrity image rights, recent litigation trends in India, comparative international perspectives, and the evolving jurisprudence that grapples with the idea of converting personality into a protectable proprietary right.
Understanding Celebrity Image Rights
Image rights, commonly known as personality rights, refer to the exclusive right of an individual to control the commercial use of their identity. This includes their name, image, likeness, voice, signature, or any other unique personal attribute.
These rights are generally bifurcated into:
- Publicity Rights – dealing with commercial exploitation.
- Privacy Rights – dealing with non-commercial intrusion.
While personality rights are well-developed in the United States and several European nations, the Indian legal system does not yet have a standalone statute governing them. However, Indian courts have increasingly invoked Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) of the Constitution to protect these interests.
The Legal Framework in India
India does not explicitly recognize image rights under any specific statute like the Right of Publicity Act in some U.S. states. However, the Indian judiciary has acknowledged these rights in various judgments through a creative interpretation of constitutional, tort, and intellectual property laws.
Relevant legal tools include:
- Article 21 – Protection of life and personal liberty (includes privacy and dignity).
- Tort of passing off – Protects against unauthorized commercial exploitation.
- Trademark Act, 1999 – Names and images registered as trademarks.
- Copyright Act, 1957 – Limited application to protect performances or photos.
Key Judicial Pronouncements in India
1. ICC Development (International) Ltd. v. Arvee Enterprises (2003)
The Delhi High Court highlighted that the right of publicity evolves from the right of privacy and can be violated by unauthorized commercial use of one’s image or persona.
2. Titan Industries v. Ramkumar Jewellers (2012)
The use of images of Bollywood stars Amitabh Bachchan and Jaya Bachchan in advertisements without consent led to a ruling in favor of Titan Industries. The Delhi High Court acknowledged the unauthorized commercial use as a violation of the celebrities’ personality rights.
3. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017)
This landmark judgment recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21. While not a direct case on image rights, it laid the foundational principle that a person has control over the use of their personal data and identity.
4. Gautam Gambhir v. D.A.P & Co. (2017)
The Delhi High Court clarified that mere similarity in name (Gautam Gambhir) used by a restaurant did not imply false endorsement unless there was clear consumer confusion and deceptive intent.
5. Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Nagi & Ors. (2022)
In a significant order, the Delhi High Court granted Amitabh Bachchan an interim injunction restraining unauthorized use of his name, image, voice, and persona, reaffirming the judiciary’s increasing willingness to recognize personality rights as legally enforceable.
Image Rights as Property: The Legal Debate
The crux of the contemporary legal debate is whether a celebrity’s persona can be treated as property, similar to tangible or intangible assets. This raises several sub-questions:
- Can personality be alienated, inherited, or assigned?
- Does a celebrity retain ownership posthumously?
- Can the state regulate or tax it?
Arguments in Favor of Property Treatment:
- Celebrities invest time and resources to build their public image.
- Their persona is commercially exploited through endorsements.
- Unauthorized use results in measurable financial loss.
- Jurisdictions like California treat personality rights as transferable property.
Arguments Against:
- Personality is inherently personal and subjective.
- Treating it as property may restrict free speech and artistic freedom.
- Absence of statutory definition leads to ambiguity and misuse.
In India, courts have cautiously leaned toward recognizing personality as a quasi-property right, especially when it involves commercial exploitation and not mere public discussion.
The Influence of Global Jurisprudence
Countries like the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada have taken varied approaches:
United States
- Several states like California and New York recognize the Right of Publicity.
- This is treated as inheritable and assignable property.
- Notable case: Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. – the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right of a performer against unauthorized broadcast of his performance.
United Kingdom
- No statutory publicity rights.
- Celebrities often resort to tort of passing off or breach of confidence.
Canada
- Similar to the UK, image rights are protected under privacy laws and tort.
These frameworks offer valuable guidance for India as it shapes its own legal response.
Emerging Challenges in India
1. Digital Cloning & Deepfakes
The emergence of AI-generated deepfakes that replicate a celebrity’s image or voice without consent is one of the biggest threats to personality rights.
2. Posthumous Rights
There is no clarity in Indian law on whether personality rights survive the death of a celebrity. This becomes crucial in cases involving biopics or merchandise.
3. Absence of Legislative Framework
Currently, India lacks a dedicated statute akin to the U.S. or EU frameworks to deal with personality rights in a codified manner.
4. Conflict with Free Speech
Balancing personality rights with freedom of speech and artistic expression remains a delicate issue, especially in cases of satire, biography, or journalism.
Case Study: Unauthorized Biopics & Brand Usage
Biopics of celebrities without family consent have led to courtroom battles. While filmmakers claim creative freedom, families argue it infringes on the dignity and privacy of the deceased.
Example:
- The unauthorized use of Sushant Singh Rajput’s name and likeness in films posthumously sparked outrage and legal threats.
Brands also routinely use look-alikes or insinuate endorsement, triggering litigation, as seen in Amitabh Bachchan’s case.
Need for a Comprehensive Legal Framework
To effectively regulate and protect celebrity image rights, India needs a consolidated legislative approach. Key suggestions include:
1. Enactment of a “Right of Publicity Act”
Such a statute should define image rights, including scope, assignability, duration, and limitations.
2. Integration with IPR Laws
Create crossover provisions between Trademark, Copyright, and Data Protection Laws to recognize a celebrity’s persona as an IP asset.
3. Guidelines for Advertisers & Platforms
Mandate consent protocols before using any celebrity identity element, especially in advertising or social media.
4. Civil and Criminal Penalties
Introduce penalties for unauthorized usage, including damages, injunctions, and even imprisonment for repeated violation.
Conclusion
The landscape of celebrity image rights litigation in India is expanding rapidly in response to a changing media and technological environment. As India’s celebrity economy grows—spanning films, sports, OTT platforms, and digital influencers—the monetization of personal identity is no longer hypothetical but very real.
Though the Indian judiciary has taken progressive steps in recognizing personality rights as enforceable, the absence of clear legislative direction continues to create legal uncertainty. Recognizing personality as a form of intellectual property could help protect the commercial interests of celebrities while maintaining balance with free speech and public interest.
The recognition of image rights as a proprietary right is not just a matter of legal necessity but a cultural imperative in today’s attention economy. As we navigate this evolving domain, the question remains not whether personality can be property—but whether our laws are ready to embrace this transformation.