High Court
LMOs victor as Bombay HC directs TRAI to settle interconnect issue
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court today (1 September, 2015) issued direction to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) to settle the Interconnect Agreement (ICA) issue between last mile owners (LMOs) and multi system operators (MSOs) within two weeks. A report has to be submitted to the TRAI on the proceedings in 30 days.
“All LMOs are advised not to sign the one sided Interconnect Agreement of all MSOs. If the LMO has already signed without understanding the same and if the MSO has not given a copy of the Interconnect Agreement with their company seal and signature within 15 days of signing the same then the Interconnect Agreement is null and void,” said Maharashtra Cable Operators Federation (MCOF) in a statement.
Speaking to Indiantelevision.com MCOF president Arvind Prabhu said, “This is a victory for the last mile operators who were constantly denied their dues. It’s the LMOs who do all the hard work in maintaining a cordial relationship with the consumers and growing the customer base, but MSOs are not ready to acknowledge this. We want a justified proposition through which the last mile operators will get their due.”
“We want an agreement, which will be a balanced proposition between all the stakeholders. We want to have a transparent ecosystem where there is clarity on every aspect including revenue system. Ignoring LMOs or not giving them their due certainly cannot be the way forward,” added Prabhu.
“A just and fair ICA will now be drafted under the supervision of the Hon. Bombay High Court by TRAI and parties involved. All MSOs are to be made parties in this matter by MCOF so that there is a common just and fair Interconnect Agreement for all LMOs across India,” MCOF said in the statement.
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?
