Renowned singer Arijit Singh has made headlines as the Bombay High Court temporarily intervened in his copyright infringement lawsuit against various AI platforms and other entities. The legal battle centers around alleged violations of Singh’s personal rights, including his name, voice, image, and personal brand.
Justice R.I. Chagla emphasised that Singh’s right to publicity and personal rights are integral to his identity, and any unauthorized usage of his voice constitutes an infringement of these rights. The court underscored the serious implications of such infringements on a celebrity’s ability to control their likeness and prevent commercial or deceptive uses of their identity.
The Case Details
In its judgment, the Bar and Bench of the Bombay High Court stated, “This form of technological exploitation not only infringes upon the individual’s right to control and protect their own likeness and voice but also undermines their ability to prevent commercial and deceptive uses of their identity.” The court highlighted the threats posed to artists and their potential earnings due to AI-generated content specifically designed to exploit them. Defendants have been attracting users to their websites and AI platforms by leveraging Singh’s popularity, thereby endangering his rights to his personal brand.
AI technology is increasingly being used to fabricate false content, including voice recordings and videos that misrepresent the individuals involved. Such unrestricted applications can severely damage the professional standing of the complainant and open the door for misuse by those with harmful intentions.
Arijit Singh’s Appeal
Singh has appealed for protections over the uniqueness of his identity, including his name, voice, signature, image, and other distinguishing traits. He discovered that AI platforms were duplicating his persona using advanced algorithms, with one platform even using text-to-speech technology to imitate his voice in communications.
Misuse of Singh’s Brand Name
The misuse of Singh’s identity has also been noted on non-AI platforms. In Bangalore, a local bar promoted an event using his name and picture without his consent. Additionally, another group used his images on various merchandise online, while others claimed online domains under his name unauthorized.
Singh’s attorney argued that he has total control over his personal attributes, and any attempts by defendants to commercially benefit from these without his permission should be strictly prohibited to protect his image. The attorney further explained that any unauthorized alterations or distribution of Singh’s performances, which could potentially harm his public image, would infringe on his ethical rights under Section 38-B of the Copyright Act of 1957.
