The Delhi High Court has extended personality rights protections to actor Arjun Kapoor, shielding his name, visual likeness, and broader personal identity from commercial exploitation without consent — coverage that the court drew wide enough to encompass AI-generated content and deepfake material.
A default judgement in Kapoor's favour was entered by Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav after the opposing parties neither lodged written statements nor mounted any challenge to the claims put before the court. Without a written statement or any affidavit addressing the admission or denial of documents having been filed, the bench determined that all averments set out in the plaint stood admitted by default, leaving no factual disputes outstanding that would require a full trial.
A legal action naming both online platforms and unidentified individuals was brought by Kapoor, centred on the unauthorised use of his personal identity to generate commercial benefit. On 29 April, a temporary court order took effect against a range of named defendants, barring any use of his name, image, or personal attributes without prior authorisation from him.
The ban covered any reproduction of his work through tools such as artificial intelligence, generative AI, machine learning, deepfakes, face morphing, and superimposition. Under the interim order, manufacturing or distributing unauthorised merchandise bearing Kapoor's likeness — ranging from apparel such as T-shirts and sweatshirts through to stickers, posters, and mugs — was also barred. Audio-visual material, spanning recorded footage, still imagery, and content generated through those technologies, fell within the scope of the restrictions as well.
Under the judicial order, several online platforms were directed to remove links determined to have violated copyright protections and to supply basic account information connected to specific YouTube channels and social media profiles.
Kapoor's legal representative informed the bench, during the hearing, that a number of the defendants had by that point already acted in line with the interim directions. Lawyers for the defence put forward the position that, given the prevailing circumstances and the absence of any realistic prospect of repeat infringement, proceeding to a full hearing was unwarranted.
On reviewing the digital links and documents placed before it, the court determined that Kapoor's name and likeness were being exploited for commercial gain without any authorisation from him. Drawing on the precedent it had already established in Rajat Sharma & Anr. v. Tamara Doc and others, the lawsuit was addressed accordingly.
Orders handed down to both the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Department of Telecommunications required those bodies to remove a set of infringing links that had not yet been taken offline. Those provisional orders, which had been lodged against a number of the remaining defendants, were subsequently confirmed as binding by the court.
Beyond that ruling, Kapoor received permission to take any newly surfaced URLs directly to Meta Platforms and Google — covering content that exploits his name, physical likeness, recorded voice, photographs, video footage, or other elements tied to his personal identity, with registered trademark violations falling under that same scope. Each platform will handle those requests according to its own internal guidelines. Should those parties take no action, Kapoor retains the option of returning to court to seek whatever directions the bench considers appropriate.
