How far does reputation of a famous family name extend? Delhi HC asks in Aaradhya Bachchan case

The Delhi High Court on Thursday framed several key legal questions that it will examine in a suit filed by Aaradhya Bachchan, the granddaughter of actor Amitabh Bachchan, against the circulation of misleading information about her on the internet.

Among other queries, Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani has raised a question of how far the reputation attached to a famous family name can extend across generations.

"The value of trademark and reputation in the trademark arises from the fact that a product or service is service has been rendered. Now, this is somewhat contextually different when you are talking about a person. A certain last name has a reputation because of the achievements, the eminence in a certain field of work, etc. So, does that reputation - you are couching it as virtually as a trademark - does that flow down generationally? If so, up to what point?" the judge remarked.

The Court proceeded to frame the following questions of law which it will consider in Bachchan's suit:

- If a family name is akin to having a reputation attached to a trademark, how far down the generations does such reputation of family name inure?

- Does fake news, even if of egregiously despicable nature, amount to an intellectual property (IP) rights violation? if yes, then what kind of IP right is violated?

- Can the jurisprudential concept of defamation (slander and libel) or any other form of injury to reputation be conflated with the recognised concept of intellectual property rights?

"These are the general questions in my mind. This is not exhaustive," the Court added.

Aaradhya Bachchan, through her father Abhishek Bachchan, had moved the suit before the High Court in 2023 to restrain various YouTube channels and John Doe defendants (unknown people) from publishing content that tarnished the Bachchan family name, disclosed any details pertaining to their private life or which are defamatory in nature.

The suit specifically referred to several videos on YouTube that claimed that Aaradhya was severely unwell and had been admitted to the hospital. One of the videos even claimed that she had passed away. The videos further alleged that Bachchans did not take any steps to provide prompt medical attention to the child.

In April 2023, the Court granted interim injunction in Aaradhya Bachchan's favour, restraining the defendants from posting any material on her health.

"Every child is entitled to be treated with honour and respect, be she the child of a celebrity or the child of a commoner. Dissemination of misleading information relating to a child, especially as regards her physical or mental wellbeing, is something which is completely intolerable in law," Justice C Hari Shankar had observed at the time.

A discussion on the scope of personality rights ensued in today's hearing of the matter before Justice Bhambhani.

"The concept of personality rights is acquiring amoebic proportions. Everything is personality rights. But whose personality rights?" the Court remarked.

Representing Bachchan, Advocate Pravin Anand argued that in the present case, the entire Bachchan family's name and reputation is at stake.

Addressing the Court's query on whether trademark-like rights can be invoked to protect a person's reputation, he said,

"Reputation is not only in a trademark. Passing off law protects much wider than trademarks. The whole family's pictures are used, words are used to give an impression that this young girl has died and has cancer. Both fake, causing so much of harm. Using the name Bachchan and pictures of the family. Abhishek Bachchan is also a party to the matter."

The matter will be heard next on September 15.