The Madras High Court on Monday issued a significant order safeguarding the personality rights of veteran actor and Rajya Sabha MP Kamal Haasan, restraining third parties from exploiting his image, likeness, name, or other identifiable attributes for commercial purposes. The court made clear, however, that permissible creative expression, such as satire and caricature, was not restricted by the order, maintaining a balance between individual rights and freedom of expression.

The interim order, passed by Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, arose from a petition filed by Haasan seeking to prevent unauthorized merchandising and circulation of morphed images and videos using his likeness. Senior advocate Satish Parasaran, representing Haasan, highlighted that these images were being exploited commercially, causing “incalculable damage” to the actor’s reputation and goodwill.

The court observed that Haasan had established a strong prima facie case for protection. “The respondents are restrained from creating false images of the plaintiff and depicting the same through any media until the next hearing,” the order stated. Furthermore, the court prohibited the sale of merchandise bearing Haasan’s name or image without his consent or endorsement. The bench explicitly noted that these restrictions would not apply to caricature, satire, or other forms of permissible creative expression, ensuring that the order would not impinge upon artistic or journalistic freedoms.

John Doe Order and Public Notice

Because several unidentified entities were involved in commercial exploitation, Haasan sought a John Doe order, naming unknown parties as respondents in the case. To ensure that the order reaches potential infringers, the court directed Haasan to issue public notices in both English and Tamil newspapers, making the interim protection widely known.

The court, while granting the order, emphasized the right to freedom of expression under the Constitution. Justice Ramamoorthy observed that citizens are entitled to satire and caricature, but commercial exploitation of personality rights cannot be justified as free expression. Parasaran argued that no commercial gain should be made without authorization, stressing that freedom of expression does not extend to profiting from Haasan’s persona.

Haasan’s Career and Grounds for Protection

In his petition, Kamal Haasan highlighted his distinguished career spanning more than six decades across Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, Hindi, Kannada, and Bengali cinema. He cited numerous awards and honors, including four National Awards, twenty Filmfare Awards, eleven Tamil Nadu State Film Awards, four Nandi Awards, and national honors such as the Kalaimamani, Padma Shri, Padma Bhushan, and the Order of Arts and Letters (Chevalier).

Haasan’s legal team argued that the goodwill and artistic integrity he has built over decades give his endorsements significant commercial value and public trust. They maintained that his name, signature, voice, image, and other identifiable attributes form part of his personality rights, deserving protection under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution, the Copyright Act, and common law principles.

Unauthorized Use and AI Exploitation

The plea specifically noted the unauthorized use of Haasan’s persona online and offline. Several websites were allegedly selling T-shirts, merchandise, and other products featuring Haasan’s photograph and initials, creating the false impression of his authorization.

Additionally, the petition raised concerns about the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and deepfake technologies to create misleading and sometimes sexually explicit videos featuring Haasan’s face. Parasaran identified a Chennai-based firm that allegedly sold merchandise with Haasan’s portraits, initials ‘KH’, and famous film dialogues without consent.

Haasan’s legal team has requested the court to issue a permanent injunction against the firm and all unknown entities, ensuring that his persona cannot be used in AI-generated content or other emerging technologies without prior approval. The petition underscores the growing legal challenges that public figures face with the advent of AI and digital manipulation technologies, highlighting the need for courts to adapt existing personality rights protections to modern contexts.

Precedent and Broader Significance

The petition referenced a similar precedent set last year, when the Madras High Court granted personality rights protection to musician Ilaiyaraaja, preventing unauthorized commercial exploitation of his image. Haasan’s case seeks to extend these protections to cover emerging digital technologies and the evolving landscape of online content.

Senior counsel Parasaran emphasized that celebrity images carry substantial commercial value, and unauthorized exploitation undermines not only the celebrity’s reputation but also public trust. The case reflects the broader challenges of digital era copyright and personality rights, particularly as AI-generated content and online merchandising proliferate rapidly.

Balancing Rights and Expression

The interim order demonstrates the court’s attempt to balance personality rights with the right to freedom of expression. While it protects Haasan’s commercial interests and prohibits the unauthorized sale of merchandise and AI-generated content, it explicitly preserves artistic freedoms like satire, parody, and caricature.

The court’s careful wording ensures that creative expression is not unduly restricted, while establishing a strong legal precedent against commercial exploitation without consent. Legal experts note that this approach could serve as a reference point for future disputes involving digital manipulation, AI-generated content, and celebrity endorsements, particularly as technology evolves faster than existing legal frameworks.

Next Steps

The Madras High Court has made the interim protection effective until the next hearing, allowing Haasan to monitor and enforce compliance against unauthorized commercial use of his image. The requirement to publish public notices in English and Tamil newspapers ensures that potential infringers are informed of the court order and can take immediate corrective action.

Haasan’s legal team is expected to pursue a permanent injunction in subsequent hearings, extending protection to cover all current and emerging forms of digital content, including AI-generated material. This move signals a proactive approach to protecting personality rights in an era where online content can be created and distributed widely without consent.

Conclusion

The Madras High Court’s order marks a landmark moment in the protection of celebrity personality rights in India, particularly in the context of digital and AI-driven content creation. By granting Kamal Haasan interim relief against unauthorized commercial use of his image, likeness, and name, while maintaining the space for satire and creative expression, the court has set a nuanced precedent balancing personal rights and freedom of expression.

This case not only safeguards Haasan’s reputation and commercial interests but also signals the judiciary’s awareness of emerging threats to personality rights posed by modern technology. As AI, deepfakes, and digital merchandising continue to evolve, the principles established in this case could shape future legal protections for public figures across India.