High Court
Delhi HC halts ESS’ cricket highlights telecast
MUMBAI: Just three days after ESPN STAR Sports announced the acquisition of telecast rights to feature comprehensive daily highlights of all international cricket played in India till September 2004, the Delhi High Court issued an injunction that no part of any ongoing match could be telecast in any form within the Indian territory.
The court issued the stay on telecast following a complaint filed by Modi Entertainment Network, the distributors of national broadcaster Doordarshan’s DD Sports channel. DD holds the worldwide telecast rights for all international cricket played in India.
ESS in an official release stated: “ESS had been licensed highlight rights for the India West Indies 2002 Series by TWI/Stracon acting for Richard Li’s Pacific Century Cyberworks (which had, in turn, been licensed these from TWI). ESS acting in good faith showed highlights for the first 2 days of the match in Mumbai. Earlier today, in a dispute between MEN/Prasar Bharati/TWI/Stracon to which ESS was made a party, MEN and PB contended that TWI/Stracon did not have the rights, which have been licensed to ESS. Pending further hearing the Delhi High Court has injuncted the telecast of the highlights being shown by ESS. We certainly expect TWI/Stracon to appeal the decision immediately.”
The Delhi High Court was in session from 10 am to 4 pm and heard both sides on the matter. After issuing its injunction against ESS, it set 25 October as the next date for detailed arguments, Rajan Kaaicker, CEO distribution group, MEN, told indiantelevision.com.
According to the information available with indiantelevision.com, the situation as it stands is as follows: DD have the worldwide telecast rights for all international cricket played in India. They sublicensed the rights outside of India to TWI/Stracon. However, this includes worldwide (including India) broadband Internet rights for streaming video and the rights for small footage sales in India non exclusively (for advertisements for example). TWI used this deal to sell the nightly highlights of Indian cricket to PCC/Now for their channel along with the streaming video on the Internet. As NOW was restructured they asked TWI to sell the highlights to a conventional non-broadband broadcaster. That is how TWI worked out the highlights package sale to ESPN.
MEN’s argument was that this is in conflict with the TWI contract as sub-license to another broadcaster in India was not part of the terms of the deal, something that the court appears to be prima facie in agreement with.
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?
