Bachchan had approached the court seeking protection of his publicity rights and privacy, along with relief against passing off and damages. The case involved the alleged unauthorised use of his identity across digital platforms and commercial products, including mobile applications, WhatsApp messages, quiz books, posters and internet domain names.
READ THIS: From Jesus & Mary College student to the Chief Justice's chair: Who is Justice B V Nagarathna, set for a 37-day CJI stint?
According to the court order, one defendant had developed a mobile application titled ‘Amitabh Bachchan Video Call’. Another had circulated WhatsApp messages featuring the actor’s photograph to promote a purported ‘Kaun Banega Crorepati’ lottery. The suit also involved a publisher selling a general knowledge quiz book bearing Bachchan’s image and defendants associated with the sale of posters and registration of domain names using his identity.
Four defendants agree to settlement
During the proceedings, four defendants settled with Bachchan and acknowledged his publicity and privacy rights. They undertook not to use his name, image, voice, likeness or any other aspect of his persona without his express permission.
As part of the settlement, the developer stated that steps had been taken to delete the mobile application, while the publisher discontinued the quiz book featuring the actor’s image. Another defendant stopped selling posters bearing Bachchan’s name and likeness. The court was also informed that the domain name ‘amitabhbachchan.in’ had been deleted in November 2022.
Court extends protection against unidentified infringers
The High Court also granted relief against other defendants who failed to appear or submit written statements despite being served with summons. It observed that the unauthorised use of Bachchan’s name and photographs for commercial gain could falsely suggest his endorsement.
ALSO READ: 'AQI already touching 400': CJI-led bench flags rising pollution levels, says this on Delhi-NCR traffic
Recognising the continuing misuse of the actor’s identity through websites, applications, posters and messaging platforms, the court extended the injunction to unidentified individuals, referred to as John Does.
The court held that the case did not require a trial to establish disputed facts and that the relief could be granted through a decree. It also allowed Bachchan to initiate fresh legal proceedings if a new cause of action arises.