High Court
HC admits challenge to Care World TV ban
NEW DELHI: The Bombay High Court yesterday admitted for hearing a petition challenging a week-long ban against Care World India TV, after the information and broadcasting ministry declined to replace its earlier order with a new detailed order.
A division bench of the court comprising Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Anuja Prabhudesai also confirmed the stay order on the ban, and this will remain in force till the hearing is concluded.
Earlier this week, the court had said the ministry order is not a ‘speaking order’ as it does not give details of the violations by the channel. The court had said that the ministry should withdraw the show-cause notice to the channel, and issue a fresh order detailing violations.
Seven Star Satellite Pvt Ltd counsel Mayur Khandeparkar told the court in the hearing on 8 November that a show-cause had been issued to the channel which had also been given a hearing by the Inter-Ministerial Committee, but the final order indicated that none of the arguments given by the channel had been taken into consideration and “therefore it is not a reasoned order”.
The channel Care World had earlier been purportedly banned from the midnight of 9 November to midnight of 16 November 2016.
Khandeparkar also said that the programme ‘Kya Karun main ab’ against which the ministerial order had come had already been taken off air and subsequent episodes would only come subject to the final order of the court.
The judge also said in his order that the channel would not be permitted broadcast of this programme till its interim order was vacated.
Also read
http://www.indiantelevision.com/regulators/high-court/stay-on-care-world-tv-ban-extended-till-28-november-161123
and
http://www.indiantelevision.com/regulators/high-court/hc-seeks-detailed-govt-order-on-care-world-indias-week-long-ban-161128
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?
