Delhi | 25°C (windy)

Karan Johar Joins Aishwarya and Abhishek Bachchan in Landmark Legal Fight for Personality Rights Protection

  • Nishadil
  • September 15, 2025
  • 0 Comments
  • 2 minutes read
  • 4 Views
Karan Johar Joins Aishwarya and Abhishek Bachchan in Landmark Legal Fight for Personality Rights Protection

In a significant move that underscores the evolving landscape of celebrity rights in the digital age, acclaimed filmmaker and producer Karan Johar has approached the Delhi High Court seeking comprehensive protection for his personality rights. This legal action closely follows similar pleas filed by prominent Bollywood couple Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Abhishek Bachchan, highlighting a growing trend among public figures to safeguard their identity from unauthorized commercial exploitation.

Johar's suit aims to prevent a multitude of individuals and entities from unlawfully using his name, image, voice, likeness, and other distinctive personality attributes for commercial purposes without his explicit consent.

The petition seeks to secure a 'John Doe' order, which allows legal action against unidentified parties, commonly referred to as 'Ashok Kumar' defendants in Indian legal parlance, who may be involved in such infringing activities. This includes preventing the use of his persona for merchandise, endorsements, deepfake content, AI-generated images, and any other form of unauthorized commercial gain.

The concept of personality rights, though not explicitly codified in Indian law, is increasingly being recognized and enforced by courts.

It broadly covers the right of an individual to control the commercial use of their identity. For public figures like Karan Johar, whose persona is intrinsically linked to their brand and livelihood, the misuse of these elements can lead to significant financial loss and reputational damage.

The proliferation of digital platforms and advanced technologies, including artificial intelligence and generative media, has made it easier than ever for unauthorized parties to create and disseminate content featuring celebrities.

This has led to a surge in concerns regarding deepfakes, fake endorsements, and the creation of unapproved merchandise that capitalize on a star's fame. The legal fraternity and the entertainment industry are keenly watching these cases as they are expected to set important precedents for future celebrity rights protection.

The Delhi High Court has historically been proactive in addressing intellectual property and personality rights infringements.

Courts often issue injunctions to restrain such misuse, particularly when it involves well-known personalities whose identity carries substantial commercial value. Johar's petition, much like the Bachchans', seeks not only to halt current infringements but also to prevent future unauthorized uses, thereby establishing a robust legal barrier around his public image.

This collective initiative by Bollywood's biggest names signals a strong message to those who engage in unauthorized commercial activities.

It emphasizes the importance of intellectual property rights, not just for creative works, but also for the unique and often painstakingly built personal brand of celebrities. As the digital sphere continues to expand, these legal battles are crucial in defining the boundaries of public use versus personal commercial rights, ensuring that public figures retain agency over their identity and its commercial applications.

The outcome of Karan Johar's suit, alongside the Bachchans' ongoing case, will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications for the entertainment industry, influencing how celebrities manage their public image and assert their rights against the burgeoning challenges posed by digital exploitation.

It marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing discourse around celebrity privacy, commercial rights, and the ethical use of technology.

.

Disclaimer: This article was generated in part using artificial intelligence and may contain errors or omissions. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. We makes no representations or warranties regarding its accuracy, completeness, or reliability. Readers are advised to verify the information independently before relying on