High Court
Star India-TRAI jurisdiction case to come up in Madras HC today
NEW DELHI: The Star India-Vijay TV case challenging the jurisdiction of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India is scheduled to come up for hearing in the Madras High Court today after TRAI was to file its written submission after scrutinising those of the broadcasters.
Counsel for both the broadcasters had objected to the statement by the TRAI counsel P Wilson refusing to file and serve written submissions. After hearing all sides, the bench had directed the broadcasters to serve their submissions by 5 pm on 27 July to TRAI and the interveners All India Digital Cable Federation and Videocon d2h.
It asked TRAI to serve its submissions on the other parties the next day — 28 July. Thereafter, the court was on Monday scheduled to take note of the compliance of submission of the written statements from the court registry. Meanwhile, both interveners filed their submissions in Court.
Arguments had concluded in the matter on 19 July and the matter had been posted for today for filing of written submissions. Star India and Vijay TV’s challenge to the jurisdiction of TRAI to issue tariff orders is on the ground that content comes under the Copyright Act.
In the hearing on 19 July 2017, the Court had refused to accept an affidavit by the Indian Broadcasting Foundation. Although the Supreme Court had in early May while staying the tariff order directed the Madras High Court to complete hearing within four weeks, the High Court had commenced hearing only in the last week of June.
ALSO READ :
TRAI tariff: AIDCF impleads in Tata Sky, Airtel Digital pleas
Madras HC to hear Star India’s rejoinder in TRAI challenge today
TRAI can only regulate transmission, not broadcast material: Star tells Mds HC
Hearing to end next week in Madras HC on Star India challenge to TRAI Tariff order
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?
