High Court
Sony moves Delhi High Court against Trai
MUMBAI: Sony Discovery has filed a petition in the Delhi High Court challenging the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s (Trai) jurisdiction over contractual matters. This follows Trai’s directive to Sony Discovery to restore signals to a defaulting cable operator without proper notice.
“We filed a writ petition in the High Court today. We want to protect our Consitutional right to collect contractual dues,” says SET Discovery president Shantanu Aditya.
On 12 January Trai had directed SET Discovery to take immediate steps for restoration of signals to Allahabad-based Three Star Communication. Sony Discovery, the joint venture company which distributes a bouquet of television channels, had switched off signals to the cable network on 14 December 2004.
According to Trai, this was against the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection Regulation, 2004, issued on 10 December. Broadcasters are required to issue one month notice before disconnection of signals in case of cable operators defaulting payments. The regulator had asked Sony Discovery to scrupulously comply with the requirements of the regulation.
Sony’s contention is that Three Star Communication was a chronic defaulter since January 2004 and owed dues worth Rs 0.42 million. “We switched them off after giving them appropriate notice,” says Aditya.
But isn’t Sony required to issue a month’s notice after the regulation came into existence? “We had served them notices earlier and they had made commitments which they haven’t honoured,” says Aditya.
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.
