High Court
Madras HC to hear Star India’s rejoinder in TRAI challenge today
NEW DELHI: Following the completion of arguments of the All-India Digital Cable Federation and Videocon d2h, the Madras High Court will today commence hearing a rejoinder by the petitioners — Star India and Vijay TV.
Concluding his arguments in the petition by Star India and Vijay TV challenging the jurisdiction of TRAI to issue tariff orders on the ground that the subject of content fell under the Copyright Act, counsel for AIDCF A R L Sundaresan explained how the Telecom Regulatory and Copyright Law do not infringe upon each other. AIDCF had intervened in the matter.
AIDCF also explained the flow of revenue and the breakup, and what is carriage, network capacity fee, distribution fee etc. It told the court how the money would be divided amongst different stakeholders including broadcasters under the new tariff regulations. The concept of carriage fee, distribution fee and network capacity fees were explained with help of charts.
Videoco d2h counsel Vijay Raman said the petition militates against the right of stakeholders to do business as guaranteed in Article 19 (1) of the Constitution. The new tariff order had asked broadcasters to declare their minimum retail price per channel to consumers and give ‘a la carte’ price for pay channels. This would give greater choice to the consumer.
Earlier last week, TRAI counsel Saket Singh had said that, prior to the tariff order, the broadcaster would sell distribution right to the multi-system operators at wholesale price level, and MSOs would accordingly sell to the consumers. Thus, the consumer had no direct link with the pricing.
The new tariff had taken away the power of distributors in terms of pricing and that has been given to the broadcaster. Hence, they are the master of their channel and can price the consumer, accordingly. The consumer also got the right to refuse to pay for channels he did not watch. Singh also explained the concept of carriage fee.
Although the Supreme Court had, in early May, while staying the tariff order directed the Madras High Court to complete hearing within four weeks, the high court had commenced the hearing in the last week of June. The hearing had commenced with the pleadings of counsel for the petitioners.
Meanwhile, TRAI TV reference interconnect offer (RIO) and Quality of service order (QoS) came into effect from 2 May following the order of the High Court.
In the hearing in April-end, it had said Section 3 of the Tariff order and all other consequences of such implementation/enforcement would be subject to the outcome of the main petition.
Apart from the Tariff order which had originally been issued on 10 October last year, the regulator also issued the DAS Interconnect Regulations which had been issued on 14 October last year, and the Standards of Quality of Service and Consumer Protection (Digital Addressable Systems) Regulations which had been issued on 10 October last year.
The orders can be seen at:
http://trai.gov.in/sites/default/files/Tariff_Order_English_3%20March_20…
http://www.trai.gov.in/sites/default/files/QOS_Regulation_03_03_2017.pdf
http://www.trai.gov.in/sites/default/files/Interconnection_Regulation_03…
Also Read :Decks cleared for TRAI tariff order implementation as HC declines stay (updated)
Star India case questioning TRAI jurisdiction over content postponed
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.
