In a rapidly evolving digital landscape, the intersection of technology and law
has given rise to complex legal issues surrounding the protection of an
individual's personality rights. The case of Anil Kapoor, a renowned Indian
actor, brings to the forefront the need to safeguard an individual's name,
likeness, and persona from misuse in the digital realm. Kapoor's lawsuit
highlights the impact of dark patterns on personality rights and the evolving
legal landscape in India.
Personality Rights and Their Scope:
Anil Kapoor's lawsuit primarily revolves around the concept of personality
rights, which encompasses a person's right to control and protect their name,
appearance, likeness, persona, voice, and other personal characteristics. These
rights are essential for safeguarding an individual's identity in an age where
technology facilitates the easy replication and distribution of personal
In Kapoor's case, he seeks protection not only for his name and likeness but
also for aspects such as his unique delivery style, gestures, and signatures.
This broad scope underscores the comprehensive nature of personality rights in
today's digital world.
Exploitative Misuse of Personality Rights:
The crux of Kapoor's claim lies in the alleged misuse of his personality rights
by various online entities and websites. These entities are purportedly
profiting from Kapoor's image, likeness, and other aspects of his identity by
selling products bearing his name and image. This raises important legal
questions regarding the commercial exploitation of an individual's persona
without their consent.
The concept of misappropriation of personality rights is not new in the legal
domain. Kapoor's case highlights the need for legal remedies to protect
individuals from the unauthorized and malicious use of their personal attributes
for financial gain.
Dark Patterns and Deceptive Internet Techniques:
A significant development in Kapoor's case is the introduction of the
'Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns 2023,' proposed by the Ministry of
Consumer Affairs, Government of India. Dark patterns refer to deceptive internet
techniques designed to mislead and manipulate consumers, often leading to
undesirable outcomes. Such practices not only infringe upon consumer rights but
can also have far-reaching consequences on an individual's personality rights.
In Kapoor's case
, the misuse of his persona by online entities can be seen as a
form of dark pattern, as it misleads consumers into believing that Kapoor
endorses or supports these products. The proposed guidelines seek to address
these deceptive practices, aligning with the broader goal of protecting
consumers' interests and rights in the digital space.
Legal Precedents and Judicial Response:
The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi's decision to grant an interim injunction in
favor of Kapoor reflects a legal stance that disapproves of any form of misuse
or commercial use of a celebrity's name, voice, persona, or likeness. This
stance is consistent with the landmark case of R. Rajagopal v. State of T.N.
(1994) 6 SCC 632, which established the principle that an individual's
personality rights deserve protection.
Furthermore, the court recognized that Kapoor's persona was at risk of dilution,
tarnishment, and blurring due to unauthorized use. It emphasized that such
protection was not only necessary for Kapoor's benefit but also to shield his
family and friends from the negative repercussions of misuse.
The Concluding Note:
Anil Kapoor's legal battle to protect his personality rights highlights the
evolving challenges in the digital age, where dark patterns and deceptive
practices can threaten an individual's identity and reputation. The judiciary's
response, as demonstrated by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, reinforces the
importance of safeguarding personality rights in the face of technological
advancements and deceptive online tactics.
The intersection of personality rights, dark patterns, and consumer protection
guidelines underscores the need for a robust legal framework that adapts to the
changing digital landscape. Kapoor's case serves as a reminder of the imperative
to balance technological innovation with the preservation of individual rights
and dignity in the digital realm.
Case Law Discussed:
Case Title: Anil Kapoor Vs Simply Life India & Ors.
Date of Judgement:20/09/2023
Case No. CS(COMM) 652/2023
Neutral Citation No: N.A.
Name of Hon'ble Court: Delhi High Court
Name of Hon'ble Judge: Prathiba M Singh, H.J.
Information and discussion contained herein is being shared in the public
Interest. The same should not be treated as substitute for expert advice as it
is subject to my subjectivity and may contain human errors in perception,
interpretation and presentation of the fact and issue involved herein.
Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman
, IP Adjutor - Patent and
Email: [email protected]
, Ph no: 9990389539