Bombay High Court Protects Arijit Singh’s Rights Against Unauthorized AI Voice Cloning
Read Time:1 Minute, 51 Second
QUICK BITE
- Bombay High Court ruled using AI to replicate celebrity voices or images without consent violates personality rights, in a case involving Arijit Singh.
- Court orders eight online platforms to remove AI-generated content and voice conversion tools imitating Arijit Singh’s attributes.
- Justice Chagla emphasizes that AI tools enabling unauthorized voice conversion of celebrities constitute a violation of their personality rights and identity control.
In a case involving artist and artificial intelligence (AI), the Bombay High Court has recently relieved renowned Indian composer and singer Arijit Singh, ruling that using AI tools to create content with a celebrity’s voice, image, or other attributes without consent infringes on their “personality rights.”
The court highlighted that celebrities are especially susceptible to unauthorized content creation through AI tools. In an interim order on July 26, Justice Riyaz Chagla prohibited eight online platforms from exploiting Singh’s personality rights and ordered the removal of all such content and voice conversion tools.
Singh’s petition argued that these platforms offer AI tools capable of producing artificial sound recordings that imitate his voice, mannerisms, and other personal attributes. His lawyer, Hiren Kamod, noted that Singh has purposefully avoided brand endorsements or the commercialization of his personality traits for years.
The court agreed with Singh’s request for interim relief and said:
“What shocks the conscience of this Court is the manner in which celebrities, particularly performers such as the present Plaintiff (Singh) are vulnerable to being targeted by unauthorized generative AI content such as that of some of the Defendants herein.”
Justice Chagla also emphasized that providing AI tools that allow the conversion of any voice into that of a celebrity without their permission constitutes a violation of the celebrity’s personality rights. He stated that such tools enable the unauthorized appropriation and manipulation of a celebrity’s voice, which is a significant aspect of their personal identity and public persona.
Furthermore, he noted that this form of technological exploitation not only infringes on an individual’s right to control and protect their own likeness and voice but also “undermines their ability to prevent commercial and deceptive uses of their identity.” Such platforms are empowering internet users to create counterfeit sound recordings and videos that misuse Plaintiff’s character and identity.
0
0
