Shilpa Shetty Takes on AI: Bombay HC Examines Celebrity Rights in Chatbot Controversy
The Bombay High Court has raised critical questions regarding the legality of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools that replicate celebrity personalities without their consent. This inquiry arose during a hearing for a personality rights lawsuit filed by actress Shilpa Shetty Kundra. The case highlights concerns over the misuse of Shetty’s image, voice, and likeness through AI-generated content, prompting the court to scrutinize the ethical implications of such technologies.
Legal Concerns Over AI Usage
The case, titled Shilpa Shetty v. getoutlive.in & Ors., centers on the alleged unauthorized use of Shetty’s persona through morphed visuals and deepfake content. During the proceedings, Justice Sharmila Deshmukh questioned the legitimacy of allowing users to interact with AI versions of celebrities without their explicit consent. The court’s inquiry focused on the rights of individuals whose identities are simulated by AI technologies. Justice Deshmukh emphasized the need for permission, asking, “Without the permission of the personality, can you use an AI to chat with anybody in any manner?” This line of questioning underscores the court’s concern about the ethical boundaries of AI in relation to personal rights.
Previous Court Orders and Broader Implications
In December 2025, a vacation bench had already mandated the immediate removal of any morphed or AI-generated content that misused Shetty’s likeness. During the recent hearing, the court considered broader relief measures to prevent over 30 platforms, including AI services and e-commerce websites, from hosting unauthorized content related to Shetty. The court’s actions reflect a growing recognition of the need to protect individuals from the potential harms of AI technologies that can distort their identities without consent.
Concerns Over Online Commentary
The court also expressed apprehension regarding YouTube commentary that discusses ongoing legal proceedings involving Shetty and her husband. Justice Deshmukh questioned whether individuals have the right to comment on such matters outside of recognized news reporting. The court noted that credible accounts of legal proceedings typically come from established media outlets, raising concerns about the potential for unverified content to harm the reputations of those involved. This aspect of the case highlights the challenges of balancing free speech with the need to protect individuals from misinformation.
Responses from Tech Companies
Counsel for major tech companies, including Google and Tenor, stated that infringing URLs are removed upon notification. However, Shetty’s legal team disputed this claim, prompting the court to allow Shetty to file an application if links remain accessible. E-commerce platforms like Amazon indicated they would continue to remove listings upon notification. The court clarified that its directives to intermediaries would follow a “take-down on notice” protocol. Tenor, which described itself as an intermediary-style GIF platform, was instructed to file an affidavit opposing the broader injunction sought by Shetty. This ongoing legal battle illustrates the complexities of regulating AI technologies and protecting individual rights in the digital age.
Observer Voice is the one stop site for National, International news, Sports, Editor’s Choice, Art/culture contents, Quotes and much more. We also cover historical contents. Historical contents includes World History, Indian History, and what happened today. The website also covers Entertainment across the India and World.
Follow Us on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, & LinkedIn
