Hyderabad Court protects actor Chiranjeevi’s personality rights

A city civil court at Hyderabad has protected veteran Telugu actor Konidela Chiranjeevi’s personality and publicity rights by passing an ad-interim injunction restraining over 30 online entities from using his name, image, voice or likeness for commercial or personal gain without his consent [Konidela Chiranjeevi Vs Mad Monkey Store].

The order was delivered by Chief Judge S Sasidhar Reddy on September 26 on a plea filed by Chiranjeevi seeking urgent relief against misuse of his personality attributes, including through artificial intelligence and future digital formats.

The order was passed against entities including e-commerce stores, YouTube channels and digital media platforms.

The Court observed that Chiranjeevi, a Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibhushan awardee, is one of the most recognisable faces in the Telugu and Southern film industry, having acted since 1978 and earned immense public goodwill as an actor, philanthropist and former politician.

It held that the actor’s names and titles such as “Mega Star,” “Chiru,” “Annayya,” “Boss,” and “Mega Star Chiru” along with his voice and image, were integral parts of his personality and carried distinct commercial and reputational value.

“The plaintiff’s claim to his personality rights is based on a body of jurisprudence laid down by the High Courts,” the Court noted.

Chiranjeevi alleged that his stills and film names were being used by several online platforms to sell T-shirts, posters and merchandise, while AI-generated photographs, memes, and videos misrepresented him in ways that harmed his reputation.

The Court agreed that such unauthorised use could mislead the public into believing that Chiranjeevi endorsed the products or ideas depicted.

“This contention is also prima facie acceptable in view of the various images that are filed in the petition. These images show, that the images appear to have been created by morphing them using the face of the plaintiff. Further the images are also used for creating various videos. This can be used not only for commercial purposes, but also for propagating political ideas or anti-national ideas or for salacious or pornogrgphic purposes. Hence, the contention that if such use is made the damage cause would be irreparable is prima facie acceptable,” the judge said.

Hence, it held that the balance of convenience favoured the actor and restrained defendants 1 to 33 and 36 from “infringing the plaintiff’s personality and publicity rights” by using or exploiting his identity, image, voice, or titles in any medium - physical, electronic, or future digital platforms such as the Metaverse or AI-based media.

Given the scale and speed of digital dissemination, the Court dispensed with prior notice to most defendants, noting that ordering notice would make the petition infructuous considering the large number of defendants and the speed at which images and videos can be propagated on social media.

However, interim relief was denied against the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Department of Telecommunications, citing the mandatory notice requirement under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Propcedure.

The case will next be heard on October 27.

Chiranjeevi was represented by advocates S Nagesh Reddy and Zainab Khan.

[Read Order]