High Court
Delhi HC rules in favour of Emami in case against HUL
MUMBAI: The Delhi High Court has upheld the right of Emami’s Fair and Handsome to run its advertisement that state that women’s fairness creams aren’t suitable for men’s tough skin. Rival Hindustan Unilever (HUL) had taken Emami to court claiming its commercial is disparaging to its own brand Fair & Lovely.
HUL claimed in its complaint that brand endorser Vidyut Jammwal’s dialogue “Ab to ladkiyon ki cream chodo” is aimed at its own product Fair & Lovely and that the ad showed a white and pink tube which is its distinctive feature.
The judgment dated 27 March, the Delhi High Court said that it cannot be said that the statements regarding men using women’s cream is false. It even added that the dialogue in question can’t be claimed to be false, misleading, unfair or deceptive and does not amount to generic disparagement.
An Emami spokesperson said, “The ruling by the Delhi High Court reinforces the fact that Fair and Handsome is built on a foundation of truth and trust. We thank the High Court for upholding the truth and the right to free speech. Fair and Handsome has earned immense consumer trust and is among India’s Top 50 Most Trusted Health and Personal Care brands (Brand Equity Most Trusted Brands 2019 study). We take this consumer trust with humility and acknowledge the brand’s huge responsibility to our consumers. We are not surprised by the consistent strategy adopted by HUL to target Fair and Handsome on frivolous grounds across forums. We will endeavour to do everything in our realm to safeguard the best interests of consumers, by empowering them with the right information.”
In June 2018, HUL aired a commercial for Men’s Fair & Lovely and Emami’s Fair and Handsome, claiming their own to be original. The High Court gave the verdict in favour of Emami and restrained HUL from circulating the displaying the commercial.
High Court
Bombay HC likely to protect Kartik Aaryan’s personality rights
Actor seeks Rs 15 crore damages over AI misuse, deepfakes and merch
MUMBAI: In an age where faces can be faked and voices cloned, even stardom needs legal armour. The Bombay High Court has indicated it will pass an order safeguarding the personality and publicity rights of Bollywood actor Kartik Aaryan, following allegations of widespread digital misuse of his identity.
The matter, heard by Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh, centres on a plea filed by Aaryan seeking a broad John Doe injunction against 16 defendants, including e-commerce platforms, social media intermediaries and unidentified entities. The court noted the concerns raised and said appropriate orders would be issued.
At the heart of the case lies the growing threat of artificial intelligence-driven impersonation. Aaryan’s petition flags multiple instances of deepfake content circulating across platforms such as YouTube and Instagram, where his likeness has allegedly been used to create fabricated videos, including false romantic link-ups and objectionable scenarios designed to drive engagement.
In one particularly alarming example, the actor’s legal filing cites AI-generated visuals that falsely associate him with controversial global figures, including Jeffrey Epstein. The plea argues that such content not only misleads audiences but also causes serious reputational damage.
The concerns extend beyond content to commerce. The suit alleges that unauthorised merchandise bearing Aaryan’s name and image is being sold across platforms such as Amazon, Flipkart and Redbubble, without his consent. Additionally, the actor has raised red flags over AI-powered chatbots that mimic his voice and simulate conversations, warning of potential misuse in fraudulent activities.
Aaryan’s filing underscores that he is the registered proprietor of the trademark “Kartik Aaryan”, with his name, voice and likeness carrying significant commercial value. The unauthorised use of these attributes, the plea states, leads to “immediate and irreparable harm” to his goodwill.
Seeking both preventive and punitive relief, the actor has requested a permanent injunction restraining entities from exploiting his identity in any form be it name, voice, signature or distinctive dialogue style. He has also sought damages amounting to Rs 15 crore for alleged commercial misappropriation and reputational loss.
The case highlights a larger legal and cultural moment, where the lines between reality and replication are increasingly blurred. As AI tools become more accessible, courts are now being called upon to define the boundaries of identity in the digital age, where a face may be famous, but control over it is no longer guaranteed.
