High Court
HC reserves order on CAS petition
NEW DELHI: CAS might have moved one step nearer to implementation with the Delhi High Court yesterday reserving its verdict on a case filed by some MSOs after the government explained its stand on addressability.
The court had asked the government whether a central law — on CAS — could be kept in suspended animation forever. The government yesterday submitted a written submission explaining its position.
“It is extremely important to examine the entire issue, in a holistic manner, in order to safeguard the consumers’ interests and facilitate the consumers to make an informed choice. In case the CAS is implemented in the pre-suspended form in Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata, the problems faced in implementation are likely to remain unaddressed,” the Centre said in its synopsis filed through counsel Rajive Mehra, according to a report by the Press Trust of India (PTI).
Hathway Cable Datacom, INCablenet and RPG had filed a case in the Delhi HC seeking direction to the Centre to implement CAS for viewing satellite TV channels in the country.
The petitioner had also pleaded that government inaction has resulted in financial losses to the MSOs who had invested in infrastructure for addressability.
Seeking time till 31 December, 2005 to examine Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s recommendations and arrive at the final decision, the government submission said, “The actual implementation would have its own timeframe, which is difficult to predict at this stage and will depend on the content of the final policy decision by Competent Authority.”
The Centre also talked of Direct-to-Home (DTH) service, saying “the consumers are likely to have an alternative addressability on cable networks through DTH service” as private companies were being issued licences for DTH service, the PTI report stated.
Earlier, the court had asked the government to either implement the law (Cable TV Networks (Regulation) Act) or abrogate it. “Statute has prescribed it and you must implement it,” the court had observed.
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.
