High Court
Govt. denies reports of imposition of penalty on Google
NEW DELHI: The Government today clarified that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has not imposed any penalty on Google Inc. for allegedly failing to provide information in a probe into its alleged unfair trade practices in India.
It said that media reports on the order of the Commission being stayed by the Delhi High Court are erroneous, since no such penalty (reported by the media as Rs one crore) had been imposed.
The Corporate Affairs Ministry said the Writ Petition No. 7084 of 2014 was filed by Google Inc. with respect to the case No. 06 of 2014 in which CCI has not imposed any penalty and therefore there is no question of stay of penalty.
The case related to issue of confidentiality and an order was passed by the Court after hearing the Counsels of the parties.
Meanwhile, the Court last week restrained the CCI from disclosing any information, considered as confidential by Google Inc, during its probe into a complaint lodged by an entrepreneur who also runs a website.
Justice Vibhu Bakhru in his order also issued notice to CCI and sought its response within four weeks on the plea of Google Inc.
“In the meantime, it is clarified that any information if submitted to CCI as well as to the Director General by the petitioner Google Inc, which the petitioner considers to be confidential, shall not be disclosed to any party and shall be kept strictly confidential,” the court said, and fixed the plea for hearing on 9 March 2015.
Google said that it had challenged the jurisdiction of the CCI in its appeal relating to a complaint filed by entrepreneur Vishal Gupta before the panel.
“The CCI lacks the territorial jurisdiction” and therefore was wrong to order a probe against Google Inc, it said.
Google also said that its action to terminate AdWords account, meant to promote its Remote Tech Support services, of Vishal Gupta/Audney Inc has “no impact on competition in India” and it has “legitimately” been suspended.
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.
