High Court
Delhi HC notice to Goswami, asks for avoiding rhetoric in Tharoor-Sunanda story
NEW DELHI: Even as it asked him to avoid rhetoric in his reports, the Delhi High Court today issued notice to Republic TV and Arnab Goswami over the Congress leader Shashi Tharoor’s defamation plea.
Fixing the next date of hearing to 16 August, Justice Manmohan observed: “Bring down the rhetoric. You can put out your story. You can put out the facts. You cannot call him names. That is uncalled for.”
Lok Sabha MP Tharoor had filed a civil defamation suit late last week against Goswami and the TV channel, seeking damages and compensation of Rs 20 million for allegedly making defamatory remarks against him during a news broadcast related to the death of his wife Sunanda Pushkar.
The lawsuit filed through advocates Muhammad Ali Khan and Gaurav Gupta claimed that the recordings were released in a sensational manner and created a ‘non-existing controversy’ by maligning Tharoor’s public life and image.
The petition said, “It is not out of place to say that Goswami and the TV channel broadcast news reports and ‘alleged expose’ which were intended to lead the viewers to believe that the deceased was murdered either by Tharoor or at his instance. Such a broadcast ‘clearly has the potential of adversely impacting the ongoing investigation into the death of the deceased’,” the plea said.
Tharoor said Goswami had earlier aired similar news when he was the editor-in-chief with another TV news channel (Times Now), which was restrained by the National Broadcasting Standards Authority.
The Congress MP also said the police was investigating the matter and had also registered an FIR. “It is pertinent to mention that the Delhi Police took statements from a number of people, including him,” the suit said. It also stated that during the probe not a single allegation has been made by the investigating authorities against the MP.
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?
