The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Personality Rights

Asha Bhosle, Amitabh Bachchan and Others: personality rights, artificial intelligence, and constitutional balance

The Bombay High Court’s recent order in favour of Asha Bhosle highlights the growing tension between technology, celebrity rights, and constitutional freedoms in India. The court held that using AI to clone voices and likenesses without consent amounts to “technological exploitation”, violating a person’s right to identity and reputation.

Personality Rights and the Law

Definition: Personality rights protect an individual’s traits such as name, image, voice, and likeness from unauthorised commercial use.

Indian Precedents: Courts have linked personality rights to right to privacy and right to reputation, recognised under Article 21 of the Constitution.

International Practice: Many countries, including the US (publicity rights) and EU (data protection laws), safeguard individuals against unauthorised appropriation of their identity.

Article 19 vs Article 21

Article 19(1)(a): Guarantees freedom of speech and expression, which includes artistic creativity, parody, satire, and public commentary.

Reasonable Restrictions: Under Article 19(2), the State can curb speech that harms reputation, privacy, or decency.

Article 21: Protects right to life and personal liberty, interpreted to include reputation, dignity, and privacy.

Judicial Balance: Courts harmonise free expression with protection of reputation. While criticism and fair comment fall under Article 19, distortion, imitation, or AI-based exploitation of a person’s likeness without consent intrudes upon Article 21.

AI, Reputation, and Commercial Exploitation

AI Tools: They can clone voices, create deepfakes, or generate caricatures.

Risk: Misappropriation may mislead the public, harm reputation, and dilute legacy.

Moral Rights: Artists can prevent distortion or mutilation of their works, recognised under the Copyright Act.

Commercial Rights: Using one’s personality for profit without consent constitutes unfair trade practice.

Why This Matters

• Artists: Protects legacy and moral dignity beyond monetary compensation.
• Technology Companies: Requires clear boundaries in use of generative AI.
• Society: Ensures balance between creativity, free expression, and safeguarding identity.

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court’s order on Asha Bhosle’s plea reinforces that personality rights, including voice and image, are protected under Article 21. Any unauthorised AI-generated imitation constitutes exploitation and reputational harm. While Article 19 permits free expression, it cannot extend to distortion or commercial misuse of another’s identity. This ruling sets a significant precedent for safeguarding individual dignity in the era of artificial intelligence.

FAQs

1. What are personality rights?
They are legal protections for traits such as name, image, voice, and likeness, preventing unauthorised commercial or exploitative use.

2. How does Article 21 safeguard reputation?
The Supreme Court has held that reputation is an integral part of the right to life and dignity under Article 21.

3. Can freedom of expression override personality rights?
Yes, but only for legitimate criticism, commentary, or parody. Misuse for profit or deception is not protected.

4. What role does AI play in this debate?
AI enables cloning of voices and faces, raising new challenges of consent, reputation, and misuse of identity.

5. Why is this case important for civil services aspirants?
It highlights how Indian courts balance technological innovation, free expression under Article 19, and dignity under Article 21 — a crucial theme for governance and law.