High Court
FM Phase III e-auctions commence, MHA to study judgment before deciding on appeal
NEW DELHI: The e-auction for the first batch of FM Phase III commenced today, even as the Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Ministry said that it will abide by the court’s order.
Director-General (Media and Communications) Frank Noronha said no decision had been taken. “But we will go according to the advice of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA),” he said. It is learnt that the MHA is consulting its legal team to examine if the Delhi and Madras High Court orders permitting FM channels of the Sun Group to participate in the auctions should be challenged.
Any decision would depend on receiving the detailed Delhi High Court judgment as the judges only read out the operative portion in their verdict yesterday (26 July).
Furthermore, any appeal in the Supreme Court will have to be filed by the I&B Ministry after getting full inputs from the Home Ministry.
The I&B Ministry had in fact written to the Home Ministry earlier this month wanting full details of the denial of security clearance to Sun Group for purpose of preparing their arguments.
Sun Group runs 45 radio channels across the country including those of Suryan FM and Red FM and had gone to Court in Delhi and Chennai when its name did not figure in the first list of 21 pre-qualified bidders for e-auction of the first batch of private FM radio Phase III channels.
Earlier, I&B sources had told Indiantelevision.com that the government hoped to earn around Rs 600 crore from the 135 frequencies in 69 channels being auctioned in the first stage out of the total expectation of at least Rs 2,500 crore from the total 839 FM channels in 294 cities.
High Court
Bombay High Court questions AI celebrity deepfakes in Shilpa Shetty case
Justice questions legality of unconsented AI personas, platforms directed to respond.
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court just put AI on the witness stand because when a chatbot starts chatting as Shilpa Shetty without asking, even the bench wants to know who gave permission. The Bombay High Court on Wednesday expressed serious concerns over the legality of artificial intelligence tools that simulate celebrity personalities without consent, during a personality rights suit filed by actor Shilpa Shetty.
Justice Sharmila Deshmukh, hearing the matter, questioned platforms that allow users to interact with AI-generated versions of actors without authorisation. The court noted that one accused AI chatbot website continued using Shetty’s personality without permission, prompting the judge to ask about the legal basis for such operations.
When the lawyer for the AI company argued that the system relied on algorithms and did not require celebrity consent, Justice Deshmukh challenged the platform’s right to recreate and make public a person’s identity in this manner. She observed that while users uploading photographs raised one set of issues, AI systems generating content based on recognised personalities posed distinct legal and ethical questions especially when the platform itself acknowledged the content was not real.
The court directed the platform to file a detailed response explaining its position.
The case involves Shetty seeking restrictions on more than 30 platforms including e-commerce websites and AI services accused of hosting or enabling misuse of her image and circulation of deepfake content.
The Bench also raised concerns about Youtube commentary videos discussing the ongoing proceedings involving Shetty and her husband, questioning whether unverified discussions could malign parties without journalistic checks.
Counsel for Google, Tenor and the AI entity informed the court that flagged infringing URLs had been removed. Shetty’s team disputed this, leading the court to allow her to file an application alleging non-compliance if links remained active.
Tenor objected to the broad injunction sought, arguing it functions as an intermediary GIF platform without capacity for proactive monitoring. The court directed Tenor to file an affidavit opposing the order.
E-commerce platforms including Amazon stated they had removed unauthorised listings using Shetty’s name and image, and would continue to act on specific notifications.
The court reiterated that directions for intermediaries would operate on a “take-down on notice” basis, requiring removal of infringing content once flagged.
As deepfakes blur the line between real and rendered, the Bombay High Court isn’t just hearing a case, it’s asking the bigger question: in the age of AI avatars, who really owns your face?
