Delhi High Court directs takedown of obscene content on Janhvi Kapoor but refuses to ban fan pages

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday directed the takedown of obscene pornographic online content concerning actor Janhvi Kapoor.

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani has passed the interim order in a suit filed by Kapoor seeking protection of her personality rights.

The Court observed that the submissions made in the plaint and the prayers sought are overbroad.

It thus directed Kapoor's counsel to revert with a tabulated chart of the webpages that contain "ex facie pornographic, obscene, prurient, lascivious" content seen to be directly monetising her personality rights to promote sale of merchandise or services.

"I am inclined to give you relief in these categories," the Court stated.

Kapoor moved the Court seeking removal of over 5,000 webpages, social media posts containing pornographic AI generated content, impersonating accounts, fake booking agencies and chatbots purportedly commercial exploiting her personality traits without consent.

The Court expressed its unwillingness to direct removal of fan pages.

"We are not the conscience keepers of the nation. Solution may be worse than the problem. It was at the very root of free speech. You may not be misusing restraint order but there may be others who will...Fan pages may be lampooning, adulatory of your work, critical of your work. You don't want fans? It is the digital world. No comments, no URLs...You will find yourself living in a cave," it observed.

Declining the plea to grant a dynamic injunction, the Court stated,

"They should just be genuflecting in front of you? Stand and touch my feet? How can you shut down all fan clubs? You are a public personality. Who is immune these days? Everyone who is in public domain is being abused left, right and centre."

Regarding the interplay of copyrights clashing with personality rights, the Court stated that the right to sell a copyrighted work is the copyright owners' right.

"I have a photo and I have a right to sell it, how is it monetising you? Somebody writes a book so he cant sell it? Right to sell a copyrighted work is the copyright owners right. I am a potter, I make a mug, I put your likeness on it, I paint you or photograph you and sell it. Who owns the copyright then? Right of poster will be with the person who took the photograph. Is right to sell not part of it?" the Court questioned.

Appearing for Meta, Advocate Varun Pathak opposed the petition, stating that it is not humanly possible to check the 5,000 links that have been flagged in the plaint.

"It is not prohibited by law to not have AI generated pictures. This people also have a right to livelihood. They want dynamic injunction of cleaning up internet," he said.

The Court cautioned Meta on this submission, since it is a mere intermediary.

"I urge you to not overstep your role. Intermediaries have no role, that itself would imply you have more interest."

Justice Bhambhani asked the counsel to assist the court in developing the contours of personality rights suits.

"I would want you to assist me to bring some sanity in the concept of personality rights. It started as something small, done with good intentions. It is going out of hand."

The next date of hearing is August 17.

Advocates Asav Rajan Arora and Abha Shah, partners at IndiaLaw LLP represented Kapoor.

[Read live coverage]